the market should be allowed to determine what lives and what dies
This may just be flamebait, but this kind of logic being modded "insightful" in this day and age is absolutely ridiculous. It is deregulation (ex. removing the government from the market) of the financial sector that got us *into* this mess! Time and time again it has been shown that the completely free market is *not* in fact the best tool to select "what lives and what dies", due to issues such as technological lock-in (think QWERTY, or TCP/IP - neither is the "best", but we use them anyway as our current market drives alternatives away).
Please, I beg you, look beyond the simple "supply/demand is the end-all" argument and towards some of the broader implications of such a system - I would recommend you start by looking at Washington Mutual, AIG, Wachovia and the people who trusted them!
Oh, nonsense. I lived in Atlanta for years, and a number of inner-city communities are more than accepting of homosexual culture, but blatently advertise it (areas of Midtown, Virginia Highlands).
I mean, given, the *rest* of the south may be messed up - and if you live in the suburbs of Atlanta (ex. "OTP"), I understand. But still, to say all of Atlanta is akin to the bible belt is silly.
Dunno who modded parent "funny", but for a non-coder like me, php.net is amazing. Very quick and straightforward solutions to just about every problem I've had.
I was thrilled with Blizzard's online store as well - plugged in (literally) CD keys I had found jotted down on 3+ year old scraps of paper, and bam, fully installable WC3 and Diablo 2 games.
Grabbed a charlieticket I had laying around, all it says is:
Subject to applicable tariff regulations and conditions of use. Ticket may be confiscated for misuse. Not replaceable if lost or stolen. Non-refundable.
Wonder what the "terms of use" are, and where one would ever, ever find them?
Unfortunately, not always. When you purchase the CD / DVD, you are purchasing a license to use the software on said CD / DVD (of course, depending on the software vendor), and being limited (in some cases, such as Mass Effect) to a certain number of installations via the method you purchased the software on.
Such limitations are the rational I have for pirating - if I bought and paid for a product, I feel that I should be able to use said product. Fairly straightforward, IMHO.
I would say the same thing about Steam - publish it on Steam, and I'll buy the thing. Or any kind of system under which (and this is key) I can download the things as many times as I want. Hell, you can even charge me.10 each time over a certain limit, fine, I understand you pay for bandwidth.
Short version of why I've pirated? I lost the damn CD I bought!
I disagree.
I use a Centro (a fancy-appeal-to-the-masses Treo) and used a Treo 650 prior to it. I have never paid more than $60, including unlimited text messages, internet and no less than 450 minutes (I had 750 for a while, even). Where are you getting the 100-120 number? Maybe thats true for the iPhone, but not for everything else as you indicate.
Apply it directly to the forehead?
Apply it directly to the forehead?
Apply it directly to the forehead?
Apply it directly to the forehead?
Apply it directly to the forehead?
Apply it directly......... *gouge ears out*
I don't have the time to respond to all of your comments, but your limitation of net neutrality to a concept which is "supposed to treat everyone's comparable traffic that same and not to charge extra for preferred delivery of packets" is not only incorrect, but also concurs with the idea that Comcast violated issues of net neutrality.
From Wikipedia (very well cited, check it yourself):
"A neutral broadband network is one that is free of restrictions on the kinds of equipment that may be attached, on the modes of communication allowed, which does not restrict content, sites or platforms, and where communication is not unreasonably degraded by other communication streams."
Under this idea of what a neutral network is constructed of, it is the restriction of the "modes of communication allowed" which has violated network neutrality. Even under your own (incorrect) definition, by slowing Bittorent packets, Comcast is charging customers that pay monthly MORE to download the same amount of data over Bittorrent, as they take more time to download. For example:
Customer A downloads music_file.mp3 (3 megs) over HTML. It takes 1 minute, and he is paying $10/month. This means they, in effect, paid ~.0002 cents to download the song (43,200 minutes in 30 days).
Customer B downloads music_file.mp3 (3 megs) over BitTorrent. Because Comcast is slowing this method, it takes 2 minutes to download. They have effectively paid *twice as much* to download the same content.
Just to quickly note, the only purpose for deep packet inspection is *being used for* is to throttle specific types of communications. I don't have a personal vendetta against the technology (though the privacy implications are touchy), but its current use most certainly does violate net neutrality.
For now I'll give you that Verizon can manipulate data stored on its server, simply because I am out of time to construct an argument.
If the customers go somewhere else to get it, they most likely are no longer Verizon customers. Plus, you assume that customers *have another alternative*, which is not always the case. Indeed, in some cases Verizon is in fact preventing access to their customers - not all customers "can still go elsewhere to get alt.*".
Regardless, this goes to the heart of net neutrality, and is a argument over technicality at best as it pertains to my original comment. Not to say this argument is not important - competiton or the lack thereof in regions is key to the net neutrality debate.
But, again, going back to my original comment, to say that the lack of legislation on net neutrality over the past five years has had no effect on how corporations has acted is silly at best.
I have searched for an up to date listing of available downloads for this box, and what I have found (http://netflixwatchnow.blogspot.com/) is woefully out of date and not that impressive. I would love a service that does this, but it doesn't seem quite ready for prime time to me...
I use sprint, and I brought my own phone - with no contract. Just took alot of chatting with the representatives (and a lot of call backs to get a good rep).
In fact, I now regularly get offers to reduce my bill 5-10% if I will lock in to a 1/2 year contract. Perfectly reasonable offer, IMHO, but the fact I had to jump through so many hoops to be in such a situation is egregious.
I will grant you, of course, that their are stringent limitations placed on how much modding you can do with Blizzard games (specifically, lets say, WC3). However, I would argue that these maps are in and of themselves mods, albeit not with all the power (server side, client side capabilities) that you may want.
Largely, our disagreement is strictly linguistic: you apparently define a mod as something that enables server side modifications and more dramatic client side capabilities, whereas I would accept anything which makes drastic modifications to the original gameplay as a mod (WC3 Tower Defences, RPGs, ect.).
> Blizzard does not allow mods like Valve does.
Additionally, you must be using a fairly narrow definition for "mods". I played a number of incredibly clever maps for both Starcraft and Warcraft 3 - while not total conversions like Valve allows for, I would certainly define some of the upper tier maps as "mods".
Not to say Blizzard isn't evil.. they nerfed my priest!
Dunno, a good internet connection, a few tropical babes, and all the coconuts I could eat and I think I might just stay.
Given, thats three things, but who's counting?
In fact, Blizzards entire new digital distribution store is based around torrents - I downloaded my (entirely legal!) WC3 and Frozen Throne RTS games there, quite quickly. As an aside, I did so on a service provider other than comcast, who I dropped a few months ago due to the incredible ineptitude of their employees to fix common problems. Line disconnects every 10 minutes? Sorry sir, that was in your contract....
Slashdot Mirror
the market should be allowed to determine what lives and what dies
This may just be flamebait, but this kind of logic being modded "insightful" in this day and age is absolutely ridiculous. It is deregulation (ex. removing the government from the market) of the financial sector that got us *into* this mess! Time and time again it has been shown that the completely free market is *not* in fact the best tool to select "what lives and what dies", due to issues such as technological lock-in (think QWERTY, or TCP/IP - neither is the "best", but we use them anyway as our current market drives alternatives away).
Please, I beg you, look beyond the simple "supply/demand is the end-all" argument and towards some of the broader implications of such a system - I would recommend you start by looking at Washington Mutual, AIG, Wachovia and the people who trusted them!
Oh, nonsense. I lived in Atlanta for years, and a number of inner-city communities are more than accepting of homosexual culture, but blatently advertise it (areas of Midtown, Virginia Highlands).
I mean, given, the *rest* of the south may be messed up - and if you live in the suburbs of Atlanta (ex. "OTP"), I understand. But still, to say all of Atlanta is akin to the bible belt is silly.
Good god, I generally consider myself on top of technology but this summary seems to be written in another language, and not just 1337sp33k....
Dunno who modded parent "funny", but for a non-coder like me, php.net is amazing. Very quick and straightforward solutions to just about every problem I've had.
The average man also has to have the *time* to get involved in his/her government - or at least the perception of having the time to do it.
Keep them busy....
I was thrilled with Blizzard's online store as well - plugged in (literally) CD keys I had found jotted down on 3+ year old scraps of paper, and bam, fully installable WC3 and Diablo 2 games.
Subject to applicable tariff regulations and conditions of use. Ticket may be confiscated for misuse. Not replaceable if lost or stolen. Non-refundable.
Wonder what the "terms of use" are, and where one would ever, ever find them?
Unfortunately, not always. When you purchase the CD / DVD, you are purchasing a license to use the software on said CD / DVD (of course, depending on the software vendor), and being limited (in some cases, such as Mass Effect) to a certain number of installations via the method you purchased the software on.
Such limitations are the rational I have for pirating - if I bought and paid for a product, I feel that I should be able to use said product. Fairly straightforward, IMHO.
I would say the same thing about Steam - publish it on Steam, and I'll buy the thing. Or any kind of system under which (and this is key) I can download the things as many times as I want. Hell, you can even charge me .10 each time over a certain limit, fine, I understand you pay for bandwidth.
Short version of why I've pirated? I lost the damn CD I bought!
I disagree. I use a Centro (a fancy-appeal-to-the-masses Treo) and used a Treo 650 prior to it. I have never paid more than $60, including unlimited text messages, internet and no less than 450 minutes (I had 750 for a while, even). Where are you getting the 100-120 number? Maybe thats true for the iPhone, but not for everything else as you indicate.
Apply it directly to the forehead? Apply it directly to the forehead? Apply it directly to the forehead? Apply it directly to the forehead? Apply it directly to the forehead? Apply it directly ......... *gouge ears out*
mmmmm.
Yeah, you are right. Given the capability I would strike my Verizon example from my original post. Good points across the board.
If *Comcast is at fault* for *making* the file take longer, yes they are Guilty!
What in the world is unreasonable about that?
Bah, customer A downloads over FTP. Not HTML. But you get the idea.
I don't have the time to respond to all of your comments, but your limitation of net neutrality to a concept which is "supposed to treat everyone's comparable traffic that same and not to charge extra for preferred delivery of packets" is not only incorrect, but also concurs with the idea that Comcast violated issues of net neutrality.
From Wikipedia (very well cited, check it yourself):
"A neutral broadband network is one that is free of restrictions on the kinds of equipment that may be attached, on the modes of communication allowed, which does not restrict content, sites or platforms, and where communication is not unreasonably degraded by other communication streams."
Under this idea of what a neutral network is constructed of, it is the restriction of the "modes of communication allowed" which has violated network neutrality. Even under your own (incorrect) definition, by slowing Bittorent packets, Comcast is charging customers that pay monthly MORE to download the same amount of data over Bittorrent, as they take more time to download. For example:
Customer A downloads music_file.mp3 (3 megs) over HTML. It takes 1 minute, and he is paying $10/month. This means they, in effect, paid ~.0002 cents to download the song (43,200 minutes in 30 days).
Customer B downloads music_file.mp3 (3 megs) over BitTorrent. Because Comcast is slowing this method, it takes 2 minutes to download. They have effectively paid *twice as much* to download the same content.
Just to quickly note, the only purpose for deep packet inspection is *being used for* is to throttle specific types of communications. I don't have a personal vendetta against the technology (though the privacy implications are touchy), but its current use most certainly does violate net neutrality.
For now I'll give you that Verizon can manipulate data stored on its server, simply because I am out of time to construct an argument.
If the customers go somewhere else to get it, they most likely are no longer Verizon customers. Plus, you assume that customers *have another alternative*, which is not always the case. Indeed, in some cases Verizon is in fact preventing access to their customers - not all customers "can still go elsewhere to get alt.*".
Regardless, this goes to the heart of net neutrality, and is a argument over technicality at best as it pertains to my original comment. Not to say this argument is not important - competiton or the lack thereof in regions is key to the net neutrality debate.
But, again, going back to my original comment, to say that the lack of legislation on net neutrality over the past five years has had no effect on how corporations has acted is silly at best.
Correct, good catch. I should have written "Preventing access to their own customers". The point still remains valid, however.
Comcast and Bittorrent? Deep Packet Inspection commencing by Time Warner and Comcast? And, Today on slashdot, Verizon preventing access to a chunk of usenet?
Either your trolling or live in a cave.
I have searched for an up to date listing of available downloads for this box, and what I have found (http://netflixwatchnow.blogspot.com/) is woefully out of date and not that impressive. I would love a service that does this, but it doesn't seem quite ready for prime time to me...
I use sprint, and I brought my own phone - with no contract. Just took alot of chatting with the representatives (and a lot of call backs to get a good rep).
In fact, I now regularly get offers to reduce my bill 5-10% if I will lock in to a 1/2 year contract. Perfectly reasonable offer, IMHO, but the fact I had to jump through so many hoops to be in such a situation is egregious.
I will grant you, of course, that their are stringent limitations placed on how much modding you can do with Blizzard games (specifically, lets say, WC3). However, I would argue that these maps are in and of themselves mods, albeit not with all the power (server side, client side capabilities) that you may want.
Largely, our disagreement is strictly linguistic: you apparently define a mod as something that enables server side modifications and more dramatic client side capabilities, whereas I would accept anything which makes drastic modifications to the original gameplay as a mod (WC3 Tower Defences, RPGs, ect.).
Additionally, you must be using a fairly narrow definition for "mods". I played a number of incredibly clever maps for both Starcraft and Warcraft 3 - while not total conversions like Valve allows for, I would certainly define some of the upper tier maps as "mods".
Not to say Blizzard isn't evil.. they nerfed my priest!
Dunno, a good internet connection, a few tropical babes, and all the coconuts I could eat and I think I might just stay. Given, thats three things, but who's counting?
"Web pages to Web places" Really? What does this distinction even mean? Could someone translate the corporate doubletalk for me?
In fact, Blizzards entire new digital distribution store is based around torrents - I downloaded my (entirely legal!) WC3 and Frozen Throne RTS games there, quite quickly. As an aside, I did so on a service provider other than comcast, who I dropped a few months ago due to the incredible ineptitude of their employees to fix common problems. Line disconnects every 10 minutes? Sorry sir, that was in your contract....