..and if this was FARK and not Slashdot, I'd feel obliged use the "ASININE" tag, and to say "OBVIOUS tag surrenders".
What I am more willing to believe is this: 99% of the people in China don't even HAVE internet access, let alone have an opinion on it; the 1% left are the "elite", and 99% of them are Chinese government lap-dogs, doing precisely what they're told to do, because they don't want their families to die in labor camps.
*shrug* I can't disagree with you about circumstances, and I certainly can't expect people to predict the future, not even their own. Where I start getting in trouble with most people, is when I say things like this: People should be considering whether they need to have children, at all. The planet is at 6.6 billion currently. Our species is in no danger of dying out anytime soon (discounting war and other self-inflicted problems, of course). We don't need couples having twelve children. What we DO need is couples who want to have twelve children, who adopt instead of creating more. But, as I disclaimed, I get in trouble with people when I start going off in this direction. The surest way to piss people off, is to start discussing the subject of reproduction. The next surest way, is to tell them what they should and should not eat.;-)
*nodding* I'm hearing everything you're saying, and agreeing with you. No, I don't want to monitor the parents. *I* wouldn't want to be monitored, that's for sure. What I'd rather see isn't going to fix the problem for the current generation, but it would theoretically fix the problem for future generations. What I think we need is education/training in school, so that people can make intelligent choices as to whether or not to become parents in the first place, and if they do, to go about the job of having and raising children in an intelligent manner. I've seen too many people over the course of my life so far who have children with no forethought to speak of as to what they're doing and what the long-term outlook of that is, and at it's worst, I've seen people who seemed to have children as some sort of fashion statement or "accessory" -- which is something I think is virtually criminal.
Anonymous Cowards can go fuck themselves -- as can you, whoever the hell you are. If you had ANYthing to say of any value, you'd be willing to put your name to it. So STFU.
..yeah, I know, it's virtually a rhetorical question for me to ask, right? I think it's a question that needs to be asked again and again, among other questions. I'm not even assigning blame here, since I think there are circumstances where doing so not only serves no purpose, but can actually hinder finding a solution. That being said I think that responsible parenting is a large part of the problem both legally speaking (the children are minors and are therefore the responsibility of the parents) and sociologically (the parents need to start being responsible parents, starting before the point of conception). I know it's an age-old problem, and it's just getting worse in many areas, and I can but hope that they're doing more than just treating the symptoms of the problem.
Sounds like so much doublespeak to me. What's next? Tattoos on the backs of the necks of the little snowflakes? Where are these kids parents, why aren't they getting involved and paying attention to what their kids are doing?
Put your glasses on, pal. You're obviously very near-sighted. This would just be the beginning. Before long you'd be paying for access the way you pay for your cellphone.
That's funny, on the surface at least. What's not funny about it is that it will happen, and then instead of "borrowing" your neighbor's wifi being a nebulous act, it'll be an out-and-out theft, because it's NOT unlimited anymore.
NO good will come from this bandwidth cap nonsense.
Sure, I'm essentially one of those. If they keep monkeying around with these things, I'll just cancel everything and make do without. I'm sure I can find a use for the $110 per month I've been paying them. I don't HAVE to have cable, and I don't HAVE to have internet access at home. It's more convenient to have it, but if they're just going to keep pissing me off, then I'll survive without. I need to catch up on my reading and yardwork anyway.
Sure, pal, sure. First they get their foot in the door with a 250GiB monthly limit. Then they'll tighten that down to a smaller figure, claiming they're doing it to "further improve network performance for a better overall customer experience". Before you know it, everyone will be paying over-use fees every month because they dared to download a couple movies from Amazon Unbox. STFU.
Yahoo is evil. Microsoft is evil. The only aspect of this issue I really care about, is that if MS bought out Yahoo, I'd have to step up my schedule to delete all my Yahoo accounts and otherwise completely divorce myself from any association from Yahoo.:p
Ill tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Sure, but who's going to foot the bill for that? The problem with utopian/anarchistic ideas: it works only so long as it's small. Once it gets big, then someone takes advantage of it. Not happening, slick.
if Comcast decides to only allow users to connect to their "partner" websites?
Sounds like hyperbole, but I'll tell you this much: there'll be rioting in the streets long before that happens -- and I'll be one of the ones with the hand grenades.
Instead perhaps we should stop running around in the shadows and actually confront something head-on? If we let them have an inch, they'll take a mile (and charge us up the ass for it).
Does the FCC have any actual pull here, or are they as impotent as the Better Business Bureau? I'd like to actually believe that somet good could come from all this talk..
Slashdot Mirror
What I am more willing to believe is this: 99% of the people in China don't even HAVE internet access, let alone have an opinion on it; the 1% left are the "elite", and 99% of them are Chinese government lap-dogs, doing precisely what they're told to do, because they don't want their families to die in labor camps.
I certainly hope for his sake that Hawkings doesn't fall prey to some 419 scammers.
*shrug* I can't disagree with you about circumstances, and I certainly can't expect people to predict the future, not even their own. Where I start getting in trouble with most people, is when I say things like this: People should be considering whether they need to have children, at all. The planet is at 6.6 billion currently. Our species is in no danger of dying out anytime soon (discounting war and other self-inflicted problems, of course). We don't need couples having twelve children. What we DO need is couples who want to have twelve children, who adopt instead of creating more. But, as I disclaimed, I get in trouble with people when I start going off in this direction. The surest way to piss people off, is to start discussing the subject of reproduction. The next surest way, is to tell them what they should and should not eat. ;-)
*nodding* I'm hearing everything you're saying, and agreeing with you.
No, I don't want to monitor the parents. *I* wouldn't want to be monitored, that's for sure. What I'd rather see isn't going to fix the problem for the current generation, but it would theoretically fix the problem for future generations. What I think we need is education/training in school, so that people can make intelligent choices as to whether or not to become parents in the first place, and if they do, to go about the job of having and raising children in an intelligent manner. I've seen too many people over the course of my life so far who have children with no forethought to speak of as to what they're doing and what the long-term outlook of that is, and at it's worst, I've seen people who seemed to have children as some sort of fashion statement or "accessory" -- which is something I think is virtually criminal.
Anonymous Cowards can go fuck themselves -- as can you, whoever the hell you are. If you had ANYthing to say of any value, you'd be willing to put your name to it. So STFU.
..yeah, I know, it's virtually a rhetorical question for me to ask, right? I think it's a question that needs to be asked again and again, among other questions. I'm not even assigning blame here, since I think there are circumstances where doing so not only serves no purpose, but can actually hinder finding a solution. That being said I think that responsible parenting is a large part of the problem both legally speaking (the children are minors and are therefore the responsibility of the parents) and sociologically (the parents need to start being responsible parents, starting before the point of conception). I know it's an age-old problem, and it's just getting worse in many areas, and I can but hope that they're doing more than just treating the symptoms of the problem.
Sounds like so much doublespeak to me.
What's next? Tattoos on the backs of the necks of the little snowflakes? Where are these kids parents, why aren't they getting involved and paying attention to what their kids are doing?
Put your glasses on, pal. You're obviously very near-sighted. This would just be the beginning. Before long you'd be paying for access the way you pay for your cellphone.
NO good will come from this bandwidth cap nonsense.
Finally, someone who gets it!
Sure, I'm essentially one of those. If they keep monkeying around with these things, I'll just cancel everything and make do without. I'm sure I can find a use for the $110 per month I've been paying them. I don't HAVE to have cable, and I don't HAVE to have internet access at home. It's more convenient to have it, but if they're just going to keep pissing me off, then I'll survive without. I need to catch up on my reading and yardwork anyway.
If they impose a high cap now, they'll change it after a relatively short time to a lower value, and so on. Bet you.
Sure, pal, sure. First they get their foot in the door with a 250GiB monthly limit. Then they'll tighten that down to a smaller figure, claiming they're doing it to "further improve network performance for a better overall customer experience". Before you know it, everyone will be paying over-use fees every month because they dared to download a couple movies from Amazon Unbox. STFU.
Hear, hear. Exactly what I was going to suggest.
Yahoo is evil. Microsoft is evil. The only aspect of this issue I really care about, is that if MS bought out Yahoo, I'd have to step up my schedule to delete all my Yahoo accounts and otherwise completely divorce myself from any association from Yahoo. :p
I think you're a blatant troll. :p Anonymous Coward much?
This has nothing to do with so-called morals. I just felt the original submission was in poor taste.
Someone is dead, and you're discussing how this will affect software development? WTF?
"Gattaca! Gattaca! Gattaca! Gattaca!"
This is all so obvious and expected, that I'd go so far as to say that it really isn't news.
Ill tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Sure, but who's going to foot the bill for that? The problem with utopian/anarchistic ideas: it works only so long as it's small. Once it gets big, then someone takes advantage of it. Not happening, slick.
Sounds like hyperbole, but I'll tell you this much: there'll be rioting in the streets long before that happens -- and I'll be one of the ones with the hand grenades.
Instead perhaps we should stop running around in the shadows and actually confront something head-on? If we let them have an inch, they'll take a mile (and charge us up the ass for it).
Does the FCC have any actual pull here, or are they as impotent as the Better Business Bureau? I'd like to actually believe that somet good could come from all this talk..