>>>That would just encourage them to lower caps to increase profits.
If the intern monopoly is regulated the same way the phone monopoly is regulated, then no, they could not do that. ---or--- If they are in a competitive situation (like Verizon, Comcast, Dish, Directv), customers would abandon ship if their company became greedy. The fear of losing customers reigns-in a businessman's immoral nature.
>>>I would also be happy to have metered service. I would pay for what I use.
I agree 100%. My P2P client averages a 10kB/sec rate which is approximately 26 gigabytes per month. I'm willing to pay a rate of 50 cents per gig == $13. (Or the flat $15 I'm already paying.)
BTW is there an actual meter I can add to my PC, so I can monitor my gigabyte usage?
P.S. Approximately 15% of Americans (probably those living in empty Wyoming or Nebraska) are still using phoneline connection (56k or less). The other 85% are using broadband DSL, cable, FiOS, or satellite.
I wonder where the survey puts people like me, who have both broadband and dialup? Also: I can't connect to both Verizon DSL and Netscape Dialup at the same time. Is there some way to fix that problem?
The U.S. average speed = 4.8 Mbit/s. EU = 5.3. Australia = 1.7. We Americans are no worse-off than our European colleagues, and vastly superior than the Aussies.
>>>>>"56% of major providers are prepared to disconnect those who 'abuse' the service." > >I've been subjected to 56K speeds for exceeding my bandwidth quota of 50Gb per month. I can tell you that if I wasn't on a one-year contract, they would have lost a customer immediately. >
This is precisely why I think Internet Companies should provide an option to "buy more time" after you reach your cap. I'm willing to pay more money (say $0.50 per gigabyte over). I am NOT willing to be cut-off just because I accidentally went over my limit.
Yeah but in this case, it sounds like it's just ONE man who is pushing for this internet filter ("Communications Minister Stephen Conroy is determined to force this filter into your home").
No. The most-important factor is aerodynamics. Take a 2000 pound car shaped like a brick (SUV), and a 4000 pound car shaped similar to a teardrop (insight/prius). The brick will get lower overall MPG than the teardrop, even though the teardrop-like car weighs twice as much.
>>>The next time I grab a 15-year-old girl to rape and kill her....... I'm all for freedom of speech, but could we exercise a little self-control over what we say and publish? >>>
Well if that girl were carrying a gun, it wouldn't matter if you jammed her cellphone. She'd be teaching you a lesson about the God-given right to self-defense of her body, as she blasts a hole through your chest.
Rapists don't deserve to live, and it is because of the existence of rapists/thieves/et cetera that human beings need to be able to defend themselves. I once defended my girlfriend against a similar creep in Philadelphia. She'd probably be dead today if I had not aimed my gun at his head. I never seen anybody run so fast.
Cellphones are a joke. By the time the police show-up, you're already raped. Better to be packing heat.
But whitespace-devices broadcasting over television channels do! If I'm trying to watch channel 17 from Philly, and suddenly it disappears because some teen's Ipod is broadcasting over-top of the same channel, you can be sure I'll do something to stop him. A "jammer" sounds like a great way to encourage him to turn-off the Ipod, so I can go back to watching the Philadelphia Phillies.
>>>Take it away unexpectedly, and they're worse off than when it didn't exist.
That's pretty much how I feel about my OTA television. White-space devices shouldn't be allowed on channels 2-51.
I'd love to get my hands on a Metro XFI (~60 mpg highway). Unfortunately most of them were poorly-maintained by their owners, so it's beginning to look less and less likely.
>>>I thought there was this whole "greenhouse gas" hysteria because of CO2 nowadays.
Greenhouse gases are not classed "pollutants" by the U.S.-EPA or the California Air Resources Board unless they damage human lungs. You can breathe CO2-laced air every day, and nothing will happen to you. BUT if you breathed CO or NOx-laced air, you'd quickly develop asthma. Possibly even lung cancer. That's why the EPA (and CARB) strictly regulate CO and NOx. ------ That's also why fuels are oxygenated; to produce less CO, and more CO2 from tailpipes.
>>>You're just phrasing it as if though old cars produce more pollution than new ones because of the cat.
According to the EPA, which regulates these things, YES an old car without cat produces ~1000 times more CO and NOx than a modern car with catalyst. Those are the facts; deal with them.
CO2 is not a pollutant. Breathing CO2 does not damage human lungs. That's why the U.S.-EPA does not regulate it. Instead they regulate CO and NOx which *is* poisonous for human beings, and according to their published statistics, a 1975 car without catalyst outputs approximately 1000 times more CO and NOx than a 2009 car.
Also it's a mistake to think a catalyst won't work with a lean-burning engine. Honda has been making lean-burn engines for years (Civic HX and Civic Hybrid and Insight), and they are all qualified for ULEV or SULEV standards, and they all get 40 mpg, 50mpg, and 70mpg (respectively).
>>>Most cars don't sit with the engine unloaded running at 2000rpm, but that's how the emissions are tested.
Not in the state of Maryland. The car is driven at ~55 miles an hour, and THEN the emissions are examined. So it is tested while under load and at speed. ----- BTW my 70mpg insight was so clean the sensors just reported 0.001 across the board. Way below the legal limits. Sweet.
>>>Of course, it takes about ten minutes careful adjustment once a week to keep it that way, which is more trouble than most car drivers are prepared to put up with.
And that's really what the EPA is talking about when they say older cars are dirtier, because they are NOT maintained by their owners. (Some people don't even bother changing the oil!)
>>>You guys have taken a game... thats it, nothing more than a game, that no one in their right mind would consider to be based on anything scientific or religous and turned it into an evolution versus intelligent design thing? >>>
We didn't do it. The dumbass marketers at the corporation did it, with their FALSE claims that Spore is being used to teach evolution at schools. That's called *lying* and it should be fully prosecuted as "false advertising" by the various attorney generals across the continent. It's time to reign in these business people and hold them accountable for their lies BEFORE they can create another economic crash.
A lot of the damage would have been minimized if the Democrats-Republicans-and-President Clinton had not repealed the Glass-Steagall Act. That act would have blocked banks from investing in stocks/securities, and therefore they would not have been impacted by the mortgage crash. They would have suffered a little loss, but they'd still be standing, since their monies would be invested in REAL assets not paper.
There's an alternate conclusion: Corporations don't want a free "laissez-faire" market, because they want to be able to use government to block competitors. For example, Comcast uses government to grant it a guaranteed monopoly in various counties across the continent. Comcast certainly does *not* want a free market. Neither does Microsoft, or GE, or numerous other companies.
Oh one other thing:
It's a mistake to think corporations don't like Democrats. The TV corporations donated 74% of their funds to support Democrats, and just 26% to Republicans. Why? Well your guess is as good as mine, but I suspect it's because the TV media knows Democrats love to regulate, and the TV media is hoping the democrats will *protect* TV's business against internet competitors (like video-streaming Ipods).
Corporations don't want a free market. They want a socialized, closed market that protects their current standing. They want competition to be blocked.
They are for regulation, same way they are for laws to protect citizens, but believe these regulations/laws should be kept to a minimum. As Jefferson said (parphrased from memory), "We would have no government if it were possible. We only resort to government in order to protect our individual rights." Same applies to the free market. We would have absolutely no regulations if we could, but only resort to regulations in order to protect against abusive behaviors. (Like scam artists.)
That doesn't even make sense. How can you prosecuted for a crime that *did not exist* at the time you did the act? If we continue down that path, I could find myself arrested because I downloaded Linux, not a crime now, but a possible future crime in the year 2010.
Ridiculous.
You can't expect citizens to obey laws that are not even on the books yet. Stupid, stupid rat-creatures. Er, politicians.
Although "Tennis for Two" is clearly a game played on a video monitor, I don't find it too useful to buy something that can only play one game, and nothing else. The first *reprogrammable* videogame would probably be the Fairchild Channel F in 1976. There's no limit to how many games a Channel F can play, except the programmer's imagination.
TRIVIA:
The Atari VCS/2600 was the longest-lived console in history. It arrived in 1977 and officially discontinued manufacturing in 1992, giving it a span of almost fifteen years.
>>>From what I'm aware the idea is supposed to be about providing internet which is rated as suitable for persons of any age.
Why should the internet be "dumbed down" to the level of a 5-year-old child??? Here's a better idea: Don't filter the internet. Instead filter the child's access by saying "no", or by installing blocking software on your kid's machine.
BTW child porn was declared legal by the U.S. Supreme Court, if the porn is simulated (young adult actors, or CGI). That's how the pedophiles get their fix in the U.S. In Australia, since such simulated images will be blocked, they'll have to start abducting real children.
>>>This plan will waste tens of millions of taxpayer dollars and slow down Internet access. Despite being almost universally condemned by the public, ISPs, State Governments, Media and censorship experts, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy is determined to force this filter into your home. Don't let him! >>>
This is what happens when you put too much power in the hands of just one man.
Correct. I can only think of 3 times where I paid more than $20 to acquire a game. The mega-popular games like Final Fantasy eventually hit the $20 greatest hits mark, and game that are not popular eventually tumble to $10 or $15.
>>>the average gaming household income ($79,000) is notably higher than that of nongaming households ($54,000),
This is surprising to me, since games are supposed to have the most "bang for the buck". $20 nets you 40-50 hours of game. No other form of entertainment provides the same dollar-to-hour ratio. For example a $20 DVD only gives 2-3 hours of enjoyment. I would think games would be more popular with lower-income homes.
Natural gas is definitely cleaner, but still not perfect. The natural-gas powered Civic ranked equal to the gasoline-powered Insight Hybrid. That's an improvement over the gasoline Civic or the coal-powered EV1 (tied), but still not better than an Insight.
Slashdot Mirror
>>>That would just encourage them to lower caps to increase profits.
If the intern monopoly is regulated the same way the phone monopoly is regulated, then no, they could not do that. ---or--- If they are in a competitive situation (like Verizon, Comcast, Dish, Directv), customers would abandon ship if their company became greedy. The fear of losing customers reigns-in a businessman's immoral nature.
>>>I would also be happy to have metered service. I would pay for what I use.
I agree 100%. My P2P client averages a 10kB/sec rate which is approximately 26 gigabytes per month. I'm willing to pay a rate of 50 cents per gig == $13. (Or the flat $15 I'm already paying.)
BTW is there an actual meter I can add to my PC, so I can monitor my gigabyte usage?
P.S. Approximately 15% of Americans (probably those living in empty Wyoming or Nebraska) are still using phoneline connection (56k or less). The other 85% are using broadband DSL, cable, FiOS, or satellite.
I wonder where the survey puts people like me, who have both broadband and dialup?
Also: I can't connect to both Verizon DSL and Netscape Dialup at the same time.
Is there some way to fix that problem?
The U.S. average speed = 4.8 Mbit/s. EU = 5.3. Australia = 1.7. We Americans are no worse-off than our European colleagues, and vastly superior than the Aussies.
>>>>>"56% of major providers are prepared to disconnect those who 'abuse' the service."
>
>I've been subjected to 56K speeds for exceeding my bandwidth quota of 50Gb per month. I can tell you that if I wasn't on a one-year contract, they would have lost a customer immediately.
>
This is precisely why I think Internet Companies should provide an option to "buy more time" after you reach your cap. I'm willing to pay more money (say $0.50 per gigabyte over). I am NOT willing to be cut-off just because I accidentally went over my limit.
Yeah but in this case, it sounds like it's just ONE man who is pushing for this internet filter ("Communications Minister Stephen Conroy is determined to force this filter into your home").
No. The most-important factor is aerodynamics. Take a 2000 pound car shaped like a brick (SUV), and a 4000 pound car shaped similar to a teardrop (insight/prius). The brick will get lower overall MPG than the teardrop, even though the teardrop-like car weighs twice as much.
P.S.
Watch this tale about a poor woman who foolishly left her gun in her car: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhyuJzjOcQE
>>>The next time I grab a 15-year-old girl to rape and kill her....... I'm all for freedom of speech, but could we exercise a little self-control over what we say and publish?
>>>
Well if that girl were carrying a gun, it wouldn't matter if you jammed her cellphone. She'd be teaching you a lesson about the God-given right to self-defense of her body, as she blasts a hole through your chest.
Rapists don't deserve to live, and it is because of the existence of rapists/thieves/et cetera that human beings need to be able to defend themselves. I once defended my girlfriend against a similar creep in Philadelphia. She'd probably be dead today if I had not aimed my gun at his head. I never seen anybody run so fast.
Cellphones are a joke. By the time the police show-up, you're already raped. Better to be packing heat.
Well cell phones don't bother me.
But whitespace-devices broadcasting over television channels do! If I'm trying to watch channel 17 from Philly, and suddenly it disappears because some teen's Ipod is broadcasting over-top of the same channel, you can be sure I'll do something to stop him. A "jammer" sounds like a great way to encourage him to turn-off the Ipod, so I can go back to watching the Philadelphia Phillies.
>>>Take it away unexpectedly, and they're worse off than when it didn't exist.
That's pretty much how I feel about my OTA television.
White-space devices shouldn't be allowed on channels 2-51.
I'd love to get my hands on a Metro XFI (~60 mpg highway). Unfortunately most of them were poorly-maintained by their owners, so it's beginning to look less and less likely.
>>>I thought there was this whole "greenhouse gas" hysteria because of CO2 nowadays.
Greenhouse gases are not classed "pollutants" by the U.S.-EPA or the California Air Resources Board unless they damage human lungs. You can breathe CO2-laced air every day, and nothing will happen to you. BUT if you breathed CO or NOx-laced air, you'd quickly develop asthma. Possibly even lung cancer. That's why the EPA (and CARB) strictly regulate CO and NOx. ------ That's also why fuels are oxygenated; to produce less CO, and more CO2 from tailpipes.
>>>You're just phrasing it as if though old cars produce more pollution than new ones because of the cat.
According to the EPA, which regulates these things, YES an old car without cat produces ~1000 times more CO and NOx than a modern car with catalyst. Those are the facts; deal with them.
Clearly he was a Sour Kraut.
CO2 is not a pollutant. Breathing CO2 does not damage human lungs. That's why the U.S.-EPA does not regulate it. Instead they regulate CO and NOx which *is* poisonous for human beings, and according to their published statistics, a 1975 car without catalyst outputs approximately 1000 times more CO and NOx than a 2009 car.
Also it's a mistake to think a catalyst won't work with a lean-burning engine. Honda has been making lean-burn engines for years (Civic HX and Civic Hybrid and Insight), and they are all qualified for ULEV or SULEV standards, and they all get 40 mpg, 50mpg, and 70mpg (respectively).
>>>Most cars don't sit with the engine unloaded running at 2000rpm, but that's how the emissions are tested.
Not in the state of Maryland. The car is driven at ~55 miles an hour, and THEN the emissions are examined. So it is tested while under load and at speed. ----- BTW my 70mpg insight was so clean the sensors just reported 0.001 across the board. Way below the legal limits. Sweet.
>>>Of course, it takes about ten minutes careful adjustment once a week to keep it that way, which is more trouble than most car drivers are prepared to put up with.
And that's really what the EPA is talking about when they say older cars are dirtier, because they are NOT maintained by their owners. (Some people don't even bother changing the oil!)
>>>You guys have taken a game ... thats it, nothing more than a game, that no one in their right mind would consider to be based on anything scientific or religous and turned it into an evolution versus intelligent design thing?
>>>
We didn't do it. The dumbass marketers at the corporation did it, with their FALSE claims that Spore is being used to teach evolution at schools. That's called *lying* and it should be fully prosecuted as "false advertising" by the various attorney generals across the continent. It's time to reign in these business people and hold them accountable for their lies BEFORE they can create another economic crash.
A lot of the damage would have been minimized if the Democrats-Republicans-and-President Clinton had not repealed the Glass-Steagall Act. That act would have blocked banks from investing in stocks/securities, and therefore they would not have been impacted by the mortgage crash. They would have suffered a little loss, but they'd still be standing, since their monies would be invested in REAL assets not paper.
There's an alternate conclusion: Corporations don't want a free "laissez-faire" market, because they want to be able to use government to block competitors. For example, Comcast uses government to grant it a guaranteed monopoly in various counties across the continent. Comcast certainly does *not* want a free market. Neither does Microsoft, or GE, or numerous other companies.
Oh one other thing:
It's a mistake to think corporations don't like Democrats. The TV corporations donated 74% of their funds to support Democrats, and just 26% to Republicans. Why? Well your guess is as good as mine, but I suspect it's because the TV media knows Democrats love to regulate, and the TV media is hoping the democrats will *protect* TV's business against internet competitors (like video-streaming Ipods).
Corporations don't want a free market. They want a socialized, closed market that protects their current standing. They want competition to be blocked.
They are for regulation, same way they are for laws to protect citizens, but believe these regulations/laws should be kept to a minimum. As Jefferson said (parphrased from memory), "We would have no government if it were possible. We only resort to government in order to protect our individual rights." Same applies to the free market. We would have absolutely no regulations if we could, but only resort to regulations in order to protect against abusive behaviors. (Like scam artists.)
That doesn't even make sense. How can you prosecuted for a crime that *did not exist* at the time you did the act? If we continue down that path, I could find myself arrested because I downloaded Linux, not a crime now, but a possible future crime in the year 2010.
Ridiculous.
You can't expect citizens to obey laws that are not even on the books yet. Stupid, stupid rat-creatures. Er, politicians.
Although "Tennis for Two" is clearly a game played on a video monitor, I don't find it too useful to buy something that can only play one game, and nothing else. The first *reprogrammable* videogame would probably be the Fairchild Channel F in 1976. There's no limit to how many games a Channel F can play, except the programmer's imagination.
TRIVIA:
The Atari VCS/2600 was the longest-lived console in history. It arrived in 1977 and officially discontinued manufacturing in 1992, giving it a span of almost fifteen years.
>>>From what I'm aware the idea is supposed to be about providing internet which is rated as suitable for persons of any age.
Why should the internet be "dumbed down" to the level of a 5-year-old child??? Here's a better idea: Don't filter the internet. Instead filter the child's access by saying "no", or by installing blocking software on your kid's machine.
BTW child porn was declared legal by the U.S. Supreme Court, if the porn is simulated (young adult actors, or CGI). That's how the pedophiles get their fix in the U.S. In Australia, since such simulated images will be blocked, they'll have to start abducting real children.
>>>This plan will waste tens of millions of taxpayer dollars and slow down Internet access. Despite being almost universally condemned by the public, ISPs, State Governments, Media and censorship experts, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy is determined to force this filter into your home. Don't let him!
>>>
This is what happens when you put too much power in the hands of just one man.
Correct. I can only think of 3 times where I paid more than $20 to acquire a game. The mega-popular games like Final Fantasy eventually hit the $20 greatest hits mark, and game that are not popular eventually tumble to $10 or $15.
>>>the average gaming household income ($79,000) is notably higher than that of nongaming households ($54,000),
This is surprising to me, since games are supposed to have the most "bang for the buck". $20 nets you 40-50 hours of game. No other form of entertainment provides the same dollar-to-hour ratio. For example a $20 DVD only gives 2-3 hours of enjoyment. I would think games would be more popular with lower-income homes.
Natural gas is definitely cleaner, but still not perfect. The natural-gas powered Civic ranked equal to the gasoline-powered Insight Hybrid. That's an improvement over the gasoline Civic or the coal-powered EV1 (tied), but still not better than an Insight.