They are not the government death panels the GOP squawked about and they do not exist because of Obama. You might say they are a pre-existing condition...
That ISPs should have to meet the onerous requirement of stating price up front, just like every country store, gas station, and kid's lemonade stand has managed since forever.
True enough that no place is 100% safe from natural disaster. But some places seem to get hit on an annual basis and others once in 100 years. The former are bad lands. That doesn't mean you absolutely can't build there, but it does mean you're an idiot if you don't build differently in order to handle the conditions. Stilt homes in flood plains, fireproof where fires happen, etc.
I read a while back about a guy who built his own home using appropriate materials in an area where the risk of fire was high. Sure enough, a fire burned through the neighborhood leaving a smoking pit of charcoal except for his house which only needed pressure washing. Unfortunately, his family found it hard to live alone with the post apocalyptic scenery that used to be their neighbors' homes.
Except it isn't at all a strawman. It's just devastating to your argument. The only reason an ISP might have to limit customer A's video download in order to provide customer B's physics video is if they deliberately sold more bandwidth than they actually had. That is, if they committed fraud.
Only if the customers freely choose to request that traffic. If, instead they choose distance learning, telework, security systems and other uses, that's what they will get. It isn't the ISPs call, it's the paying customers'.
And in answer to your concerns, the GOP did fuck all. There are plenty of possibilities to improve the situation, but the GOP simply isn't open to those answers even though they work at least better than our system literally everywhere they have been implemented and at half the cost. It was GOP naysaying that kept the ACA from including those solutions in the first place. The situation isn't going to improve until the GOP either pull their heads out of their asses or get voted out. I'm fine with either.
I kept my doctor. I see no death panels. The issue was debated ad-nausium. I would have liked to see the ACA go much further, but the GOP wasn't open to anything that might cut the insurance companies out of the picture, or even weaken their position.
Meanwhile, the GOP has wasted many MONTHS since Trump came into office trying to come up with something better and have failed time after time. You can't blame the Dems, the Rs control House, Senate, and the Oval office. The only 'solutions' they could come up with were so vile that even parts of the GOP couldn't hold their noses hard enough to pass it.
Now they're trying so hard to pull a fast one with the tax bill they totally forgot to renew the Patriot (traitor) act.
But look out! Something truly despicable must be brewing in D.C. since Trump needlessly dumped a 55 gallon drum of gasoline on the dumpster fire that is Israeli-Palestinian relations as a diversion.
But they need not do it by creating fast lanes and slow lanes. They need not do anything like deep packet inspection. Simple fair queuing will take care of it.
In other words, throttling to contracted bandwidth can be done in a neutral manner just fine.
If you already have a copy, and then download a copy in another form, it is CONSTRUCTIVELY a format shift. It might take a good lawyer to make that stick, of course.
This is exactly the kind of nonsense with "packages" that got people wanting to cut the cord in the first place. This show is only in the FireTV package, but that one is only in the Chromecast package. Soon, your TV looks like a porcupine with all those things sticking out of it.
It would be nice if the Android permissions could be better divided in places. As you point out, knowing the phone is off hook or ringing is legitimate for practically any app that generates sound, but they don't really need to know who is calling or being called. Unfortunately, asking for one without the other isn't possible so everyone gets the side eye.
Likewise, a bunch of apps that need extra storage space end up making suspicious sounding requests to access photos, music, and videos when all they really want is the ability to have their own private directory to store a few things in.
Except that by definition scalpers who move more of the good to consumers are contributing to the process.
Only in the sense that if I break your window at midnight, and fix your window in the morning (for a price, of course), I am "contributing" to you having in-tact windows.
In the most elemental form, the scalper sees you buying the item, shoves you into the ditch and buys it himself, then turns to you offering to sell it for ten times the price. You somehow see a valuable economic activity. Most economists and for that matter typical consumers do not.
They don't move more of the good. They jump in the middle of a transaction that was already very likely to happen without them in order to skim off the top. They generally manipulate local market conditions in order to facilitate that even while reducing market efficiency.
I certainly do suspect that many local governments do that and other dirty tricks. Red light cameras are a frequent source of such abuses. It is notable that in places where the courts have ordered appropriate lengthening of the yellow light, the red light cameras quickly disappeared. Then of course, there are the convictions for bribes and kick-backs in Chicago.
Except that he actually did show mathematically that there existed a window where the yellow wasn't long enough to stop or clear the intersection before the red for a car obeying the speed limit. That may only be true of some of the lights or it may have only been true until a change was made to avoid backlash.
Nevertheless, his free speech was certainly violated and no plausible explanation of the behavior suggests good intentions.
Yea, except The Declaration of Independence also mentions Liberty which, obviously, is curtailed when you start having government strong arming to try to maintain the pursuit of happiness.
So for the sake of liberty, we must legalize burglary? (for example)
Unlike the scalper, retail sellers actually do something to contribute to the process of getting the good from the manufacturer to the consumer. If a store suddenly starts charging scalper prices, it will go out of business (due to market forces). If it also manipulates availability so that it doesn't get pushed out of business (by buying up more stock than it can sell so that other retailers can't get enough), then it has become a scalper and should be stopped. If they all decide to raise their prices in unison so they don't get competed into the ground, that's collusion and runs afoul of anti-trust laws.
As for your highly artificial scenario where a scalper accidentally helps distribute the product, that pre-supposes that most potential buyers believe $1000 is a worth-while price for a $15 item and even that they can actually afford to pay that. It also pre-supposes that they will actually find flybynightthugs.xyz but for some reason wouldn't have found amazon.com (where the scalper bought the remaining stock to increase scarcity).
Productive can be a rather low bar. Making the child happy can be considered productive since happiness is a generally accepted goal of humanity (its pursuit is even in The Declaration of Independence). In turn, it also tends to make the parents happier. The manufacturer turns raw materials into toys to make the child (and parents) happier. The retailer along with logistics companies get the toys from the manufacturer and deals with distribution to individual parents. The scalper.... Well, keeps the parents from being able to afford the toys and causes them to sit on shelves, so negative productivity there.
Tinker toys and lego were by far the best toys. They could be anything at any time. If you needed a laser gun, tinker toys to the rescue. Of course, a stick would do in a pinch.
Of course, more structured toys were subject to being used to represent something entirely different whenever necessary. Absolutely nothing said Big Jim couldn't catch a radioactive fish and gain super powers.
We certainly have a good case for it here. Even if I could moderate that post, I have no idea what moderation to give it. I can't even decide if it should be moderated up for all to see or down. Perhaps a zero valued WTF mod?
They want lots of lovely ticket revenue and he demonstrated mathematically that they had rigged the lights such that it was not always possible to obey the light even while driving lawfully. That would cut into that ticket revenue and could even cause them to have to give some back.
People were hearing his message and starting to raise a fuss about it so they acted in haste to shut him up. Now they're going to be educated in the Streisand effect.
Slashdot Mirror
Fine then, I guess you think the dinner needed to be shot up with AKs?
They are not the government death panels the GOP squawked about and they do not exist because of Obama. You might say they are a pre-existing condition...
That and little kids have a better developed sense of business ethics than Ajit or ISP executives.
That ISPs should have to meet the onerous requirement of stating price up front, just like every country store, gas station, and kid's lemonade stand has managed since forever.
True enough that no place is 100% safe from natural disaster. But some places seem to get hit on an annual basis and others once in 100 years. The former are bad lands. That doesn't mean you absolutely can't build there, but it does mean you're an idiot if you don't build differently in order to handle the conditions. Stilt homes in flood plains, fireproof where fires happen, etc.
I read a while back about a guy who built his own home using appropriate materials in an area where the risk of fire was high. Sure enough, a fire burned through the neighborhood leaving a smoking pit of charcoal except for his house which only needed pressure washing. Unfortunately, his family found it hard to live alone with the post apocalyptic scenery that used to be their neighbors' homes.
Except it isn't at all a strawman. It's just devastating to your argument. The only reason an ISP might have to limit customer A's video download in order to provide customer B's physics video is if they deliberately sold more bandwidth than they actually had. That is, if they committed fraud.
Only if the customers freely choose to request that traffic. If, instead they choose distance learning, telework, security systems and other uses, that's what they will get. It isn't the ISPs call, it's the paying customers'.
Your link is an ink blot. Some see a clown, some see a death panel. No answer is particularly right or wrong.
And in answer to your concerns, the GOP did fuck all. There are plenty of possibilities to improve the situation, but the GOP simply isn't open to those answers even though they work at least better than our system literally everywhere they have been implemented and at half the cost. It was GOP naysaying that kept the ACA from including those solutions in the first place. The situation isn't going to improve until the GOP either pull their heads out of their asses or get voted out. I'm fine with either.
I kept my doctor. I see no death panels. The issue was debated ad-nausium. I would have liked to see the ACA go much further, but the GOP wasn't open to anything that might cut the insurance companies out of the picture, or even weaken their position.
Meanwhile, the GOP has wasted many MONTHS since Trump came into office trying to come up with something better and have failed time after time. You can't blame the Dems, the Rs control House, Senate, and the Oval office. The only 'solutions' they could come up with were so vile that even parts of the GOP couldn't hold their noses hard enough to pass it.
Now they're trying so hard to pull a fast one with the tax bill they totally forgot to renew the Patriot (traitor) act.
But look out! Something truly despicable must be brewing in D.C. since Trump needlessly dumped a 55 gallon drum of gasoline on the dumpster fire that is Israeli-Palestinian relations as a diversion.
It's time to wake up and smell the coffee!
But they need not do it by creating fast lanes and slow lanes. They need not do anything like deep packet inspection. Simple fair queuing will take care of it.
In other words, throttling to contracted bandwidth can be done in a neutral manner just fine.
I would think very narrow beams of microwaves would be more likely than ultrasound.
If you already have a copy, and then download a copy in another form, it is CONSTRUCTIVELY a format shift. It might take a good lawyer to make that stick, of course.
Are you sure you can opt out? I picked DirecTV over ATT for cable, so ATT bought DirecTV.
There was a while when I had to keep changing banks because they kept being bought by the bank I chose against in the first place.
Then there's the dizzying world of rebranding. It can actually be surprisingly hard to vote with your wallet.
This is exactly the kind of nonsense with "packages" that got people wanting to cut the cord in the first place. This show is only in the FireTV package, but that one is only in the Chromecast package. Soon, your TV looks like a porcupine with all those things sticking out of it.
It would be nice if the Android permissions could be better divided in places. As you point out, knowing the phone is off hook or ringing is legitimate for practically any app that generates sound, but they don't really need to know who is calling or being called. Unfortunately, asking for one without the other isn't possible so everyone gets the side eye.
Likewise, a bunch of apps that need extra storage space end up making suspicious sounding requests to access photos, music, and videos when all they really want is the ability to have their own private directory to store a few things in.
Except that by definition scalpers who move more of the good to consumers are contributing to the process.
Only in the sense that if I break your window at midnight, and fix your window in the morning (for a price, of course), I am "contributing" to you having in-tact windows.
In the most elemental form, the scalper sees you buying the item, shoves you into the ditch and buys it himself, then turns to you offering to sell it for ten times the price. You somehow see a valuable economic activity. Most economists and for that matter typical consumers do not.
They don't move more of the good. They jump in the middle of a transaction that was already very likely to happen without them in order to skim off the top. They generally manipulate local market conditions in order to facilitate that even while reducing market efficiency.
I certainly do suspect that many local governments do that and other dirty tricks. Red light cameras are a frequent source of such abuses. It is notable that in places where the courts have ordered appropriate lengthening of the yellow light, the red light cameras quickly disappeared. Then of course, there are the convictions for bribes and kick-backs in Chicago.
Except that he actually did show mathematically that there existed a window where the yellow wasn't long enough to stop or clear the intersection before the red for a car obeying the speed limit. That may only be true of some of the lights or it may have only been true until a change was made to avoid backlash.
Nevertheless, his free speech was certainly violated and no plausible explanation of the behavior suggests good intentions.
Yea, except The Declaration of Independence also mentions Liberty which, obviously, is curtailed when you start having government strong arming to try to maintain the pursuit of happiness.
So for the sake of liberty, we must legalize burglary? (for example)
Unlike the scalper, retail sellers actually do something to contribute to the process of getting the good from the manufacturer to the consumer. If a store suddenly starts charging scalper prices, it will go out of business (due to market forces). If it also manipulates availability so that it doesn't get pushed out of business (by buying up more stock than it can sell so that other retailers can't get enough), then it has become a scalper and should be stopped. If they all decide to raise their prices in unison so they don't get competed into the ground, that's collusion and runs afoul of anti-trust laws.
As for your highly artificial scenario where a scalper accidentally helps distribute the product, that pre-supposes that most potential buyers believe $1000 is a worth-while price for a $15 item and even that they can actually afford to pay that. It also pre-supposes that they will actually find flybynightthugs.xyz but for some reason wouldn't have found amazon.com (where the scalper bought the remaining stock to increase scarcity).
Productive can be a rather low bar. Making the child happy can be considered productive since happiness is a generally accepted goal of humanity (its pursuit is even in The Declaration of Independence). In turn, it also tends to make the parents happier. The manufacturer turns raw materials into toys to make the child (and parents) happier. The retailer along with logistics companies get the toys from the manufacturer and deals with distribution to individual parents. The scalper .... Well, keeps the parents from being able to afford the toys and causes them to sit on shelves, so negative productivity there.
Tinker toys and lego were by far the best toys. They could be anything at any time. If you needed a laser gun, tinker toys to the rescue. Of course, a stick would do in a pinch.
Of course, more structured toys were subject to being used to represent something entirely different whenever necessary. Absolutely nothing said Big Jim couldn't catch a radioactive fish and gain super powers.
What if they want biblical action figures so they can act out the stories of the Bible with their friends?
We certainly have a good case for it here. Even if I could moderate that post, I have no idea what moderation to give it. I can't even decide if it should be moderated up for all to see or down. Perhaps a zero valued WTF mod?
They want lots of lovely ticket revenue and he demonstrated mathematically that they had rigged the lights such that it was not always possible to obey the light even while driving lawfully. That would cut into that ticket revenue and could even cause them to have to give some back.
People were hearing his message and starting to raise a fuss about it so they acted in haste to shut him up. Now they're going to be educated in the Streisand effect.