Have you read the bill? For the FCC to be granted standing as an injured party, they'd have to prove that THEY have authority over ISP contracts in Cali.
Also, this will NEVER make it to the SC, no matter which way it goes.
You have failed to provide a coherent thought on the topic at hand. You seem to think that it has something to do with America, rather than to do with China.
Technology assists in the realization of ideas, for good or ill. I'm pretty fucking pissed that they leveraged their analytics tracking experience to assist in depriving freedom to people, but I can't say I'm surprised.
I know you're known for moronic comments, but holy shit.
In the United States, you are FREE to have that opinion about the government. The issue at hand is direct assistance of the identification for punishment of human beings for having opinions.
Whether you already knew that or not, that is what we are here to talk about.
I choose the road less traveled. 'Your' site doesn't get to write cookies by default on my machine. Your 2nd- and 3rd-party content does not load. If your site has little utility at this browsing level, it is a value judgment for me, one which your site will usually lose.
Your initial debate conditions assume that the difficulty in reaching site content is something which I have to endure. We would do well in this industry to treat web content much more like a luxury than a necessity.
1. Promote shitty bloated ad-vomiting websites.
2. Claim the web experience is broken.
3. Insist your proprietary technology which detects & catalogs 100% of the web experience is the solution!
4. Profit!
5. Goto 1...
True story: about two years ago, Google chatted with our marketing team about AMP, and how it was the bee's knees and would make everything SO FAST for us. They presented the Marketing team with charts showing approximately 2 seconds of page load, and how AMP could cut that down!
When they got back from California and we showed them that 90% of that 2 seconds was analytics+tracking, they were less "amped"...
Ads are dangerous. They often contain malware. Google is by far the best when it comes to checking ads for malware and limiting them to text and a malware scanned link. Also, you can really easily block them. So AMP pages are great if you like your privacy.
Why does Google need to be involved in my http queries at all? It's not altruism.
And from the webmaster's perspective, AMP is a "standard" which only helps Google, NOT ANYONE ELSE.
If "Ads are dangerous", why should anyone trust Pusher No. 1? The company has come a long way from Not-An-Ad-Company.
Because people might otherwise switch to VKontakte perhaps? And the latter has no problem with naked tits as well, so nu prudish US censorship anymore.
I agree with everything you said and would only add that for 4GB+ files, VLCs tearing is awful.
Actually, from my own Eye Tests (long-time video editing background), VLC's *screenshots* of identical frames appear better than MPC-HCs, but of course, you may only get 1 frame in 30 in VLC while playing...
Slashdot Mirror
can the States preempt the authority of the FCC?
Have you read the bill? For the FCC to be granted standing as an injured party, they'd have to prove that THEY have authority over ISP contracts in Cali.
Also, this will NEVER make it to the SC, no matter which way it goes.
You have failed to provide a coherent thought on the topic at hand. You seem to think that it has something to do with America, rather than to do with China.
Thanks for playing.
fantasy
Technology assists in the realization of ideas, for good or ill. I'm pretty fucking pissed that they leveraged their analytics tracking experience to assist in depriving freedom to people, but I can't say I'm surprised.
I know you're known for moronic comments, but holy shit.
In the United States, you are FREE to have that opinion about the government. The issue at hand is direct assistance of the identification for punishment of human beings for having opinions.
Whether you already knew that or not, that is what we are here to talk about.
It's Friday afternoon. I care.
"Which is still under development"
What could possibly go right?
Apping apps to the app so you can app the app!
Okay, now that THAT'S out of the way, looks okay, but I think Randall should sue.
providing choice rather than just loading you with so much tracking garbage
Where is there a consumer choice involved that wasn't there before?
You should google how much faster common websites load in the EU compared to the USA because of that pesky meddling.
This has not-much to do with the meddling on its face and much more to do with Privacy Laws that have teeth.
How about, instead of voting for "the lesser evil," you stop voting for evil alltogether?
Because then the bigger evil wins, you fucking obtuse charlatan.
They chuckle much less these days.
online banking
My bank's site works with only "*.{bank}.com" cookies. No 3rd party scripts, and only "{bank}media.com" imagery.
And this is the whole point: we are the customers. We are not the fucking product.
You have a choice for your ad-supported content
I choose the road less traveled. 'Your' site doesn't get to write cookies by default on my machine. Your 2nd- and 3rd-party content does not load. If your site has little utility at this browsing level, it is a value judgment for me, one which your site will usually lose.
Your initial debate conditions assume that the difficulty in reaching site content is something which I have to endure. We would do well in this industry to treat web content much more like a luxury than a necessity.
Why? It's and open standard... and, AFAICT, a good and useful one.
Useful for who? The utility it provides is to Google, not the user.
There may come a day when I let Google tell me how I want to utilize HTTP.
But today is not that day.
1. Promote shitty bloated ad-vomiting websites.
2. Claim the web experience is broken.
3. Insist your proprietary technology which detects & catalogs 100% of the web experience is the solution!
4. Profit!
5. Goto 1...
Webmasters should really just write mobile websites that don't suck ass, but that's apparently just not something they'll do of their own volition.
And since Google is doing it for them, they will NEVER learn. I don't see this as a good thing.
If Google has their thumb on the scales, the market will never have the correct information to shutter bad sites.
True story: about two years ago, Google chatted with our marketing team about AMP, and how it was the bee's knees and would make everything SO FAST for us. They presented the Marketing team with charts showing approximately 2 seconds of page load, and how AMP could cut that down!
When they got back from California and we showed them that 90% of that 2 seconds was analytics+tracking, they were less "amped"...
I can't believe what I'm reading here.
Ads are dangerous. They often contain malware. Google is by far the best when it comes to checking ads for malware and limiting them to text and a malware scanned link. Also, you can really easily block them. So AMP pages are great if you like your privacy.
Why does Google need to be involved in my http queries at all? It's not altruism.
And from the webmaster's perspective, AMP is a "standard" which only helps Google, NOT ANYONE ELSE.
If "Ads are dangerous", why should anyone trust Pusher No. 1? The company has come a long way from Not-An-Ad-Company.
You don't know me.
Why is this being framed as an economic issue, at all?
The fucking point is to pressure them into treating their people better, not to affect the US markets.
Since we're clearly not doing that, the rest is just theatre.
If they want more theater, well, then they have to keep waiting.
They have subpoena power, man.
"They can make money off it, that makes it their business"
That is a disgusting attitude, and is why we need some regulation: rent-seeking.
No, it doesn't. Please don't try car analogies without a licence.
It's like, the pipes are the ISP. As long as Facebook isn't sending corrosive liquids down the pipes, what business is it of the ISPs?
Just wanted to say, you are tireless, and we notice.
Because people might otherwise switch to VKontakte perhaps? And the latter has no problem with naked tits as well, so nu prudish US censorship anymore.
This post is useless without links.
I agree with everything you said and would only add that for 4GB+ files, VLCs tearing is awful.
Actually, from my own Eye Tests (long-time video editing background), VLC's *screenshots* of identical frames appear better than MPC-HCs, but of course, you may only get 1 frame in 30 in VLC while playing...