It seemed to be pretty easy to figure it out with the Netflix debacle. Netflix speed and bandwidth on Verizon and Comcast were high. Then they weren't. Then Netflix paid Comcast and they were high again. Then Netflix paid Verizon, and after a bit, they were high again.
Yes, public media. Public airwaves for radio and TV. But that's physical (geographically limited) space that the US agencies can control.
The FCC has no legal authority over Internet content. They'd be laughed at if they tried. Seriously, look at other nations that have attempted to censor content and see how successful they've been. The only ones that are truly successful are Iran and North Korea, but that's due to how their Internet is set up. They're basically on one big LAN, so outside access can be easily filtered. Think something like that would ever work in the US, where we've got multiple access points outside the country?
Except it won't be the FCC regulating that. It'll be Congress, like they've tried to do with SOPA, PIPA, CISPA, CISA, and a bunch of other acronyms. It'll be in the interest of "protecting copyright" and extend to "defending against terrorism" and then finally "protecting children."
No, you won't. Do you get a choice for power provider? Water? Gas? If ISPs are going to be regulated like utilities, expect they'll keep their monopolies.
This just prevents them from getting too tyrannical. (Some tyranny not excluded, only applies to offers available in your area, etc, etc)
I'm a little confused. You've recognized that the free market wouldn't have come to this conclusion on their own, implying that government intervention was necessary. But then you condemn the government for bowing to free market demands for things like local monopoly powers, banning public competition, etc? So you'd prefer that local governments boycott big business until they cow to the demands of Small Town USA, and deprive their residents of access to what is arguably a modern necessity?
We already know it's going to court. Verizon and AT&T have been threatening it for months. AT&T just published its future lawsuit against the rules. But the courts ruled initially in favor of Verizon's lawsuit from 2010 that the FCC couldn't regulate carriers like Title II without using Title II. Now you expect the courts to say that the FCC can't use Title II? That's hardly going to be any semblance of legal interpretation of the existing telecom laws.
Huh? Are you drinking your own kool-aid? How does ensuring that corporations don't prioritize Internet traffic (and unfairly disenfranchise startups and direct competitors) get the government more involved in your life? The FCC isn't regulating the content of the Internet, just how it's delivered.
Kids aren't concerned about credible threatening statements. They're concerned with how those statements made them feel. If a kid threatened me with the One Ring, I might feel utterly terrified if I didn't know what it was. If I did, I wouldn't feel scared at all, I would probably feel humored and laugh. One kid's threat is another kid's joke.
The proper lesson to the kid would be how to recognize when we've hurt the feelings of others and learn how to apologize for our actions, and in the future try not to take actions that are going to hurt feelings.
Mod this parent up, please. I can't understand why schools have gotten so trigger-happy nowadays. It's like they believe that suspension or expulsion are the only ways to deal with misbehavior, or even simple mistakes. It's going to leave these children ill-equipped for dealing with mistakes in the future, they'll either be too scared to admit them (for fear of unreasonably harsh punishment) or be unable to understand the difference between a corrective action and a punishment. What's that going to do for them in high school? College? The workforce? For their own families?
Slashdot Mirror
It seemed to be pretty easy to figure it out with the Netflix debacle. Netflix speed and bandwidth on Verizon and Comcast were high. Then they weren't. Then Netflix paid Comcast and they were high again. Then Netflix paid Verizon, and after a bit, they were high again.
Yes, public media. Public airwaves for radio and TV. But that's physical (geographically limited) space that the US agencies can control.
The FCC has no legal authority over Internet content. They'd be laughed at if they tried. Seriously, look at other nations that have attempted to censor content and see how successful they've been. The only ones that are truly successful are Iran and North Korea, but that's due to how their Internet is set up. They're basically on one big LAN, so outside access can be easily filtered. Think something like that would ever work in the US, where we've got multiple access points outside the country?
I did say I was only a little confused. But I do appreciate you looking out for me.
Except it won't be the FCC regulating that. It'll be Congress, like they've tried to do with SOPA, PIPA, CISPA, CISA, and a bunch of other acronyms. It'll be in the interest of "protecting copyright" and extend to "defending against terrorism" and then finally "protecting children."
But from the FCC? Not in a million years.
No, you won't. Do you get a choice for power provider? Water? Gas? If ISPs are going to be regulated like utilities, expect they'll keep their monopolies.
This just prevents them from getting too tyrannical. (Some tyranny not excluded, only applies to offers available in your area, etc, etc)
I'm a little confused. You've recognized that the free market wouldn't have come to this conclusion on their own, implying that government intervention was necessary. But then you condemn the government for bowing to free market demands for things like local monopoly powers, banning public competition, etc? So you'd prefer that local governments boycott big business until they cow to the demands of Small Town USA, and deprive their residents of access to what is arguably a modern necessity?
You mean just because my construction crew built the highway, we don't get to charge tolls for it and choose which traffic drives? How is that fair?!
We already know it's going to court. Verizon and AT&T have been threatening it for months. AT&T just published its future lawsuit against the rules. But the courts ruled initially in favor of Verizon's lawsuit from 2010 that the FCC couldn't regulate carriers like Title II without using Title II. Now you expect the courts to say that the FCC can't use Title II? That's hardly going to be any semblance of legal interpretation of the existing telecom laws.
Feel free to forget. The North Remembers!
Huh? Are you drinking your own kool-aid? How does ensuring that corporations don't prioritize Internet traffic (and unfairly disenfranchise startups and direct competitors) get the government more involved in your life? The FCC isn't regulating the content of the Internet, just how it's delivered.
Yep, and Melatonin is basically a natural Ambien.
Which one can get around by signing out of Google, using an incognito/private browsing window, or using a service like TOR.
Indeed. I'm waiting for some local judge to grow a backbone and dismiss a case for stupidity.
What happens to the teachers at this school who get pregnant? Or are we back in the 19th century again?
Kids aren't concerned about credible threatening statements. They're concerned with how those statements made them feel. If a kid threatened me with the One Ring, I might feel utterly terrified if I didn't know what it was. If I did, I wouldn't feel scared at all, I would probably feel humored and laugh. One kid's threat is another kid's joke.
The proper lesson to the kid would be how to recognize when we've hurt the feelings of others and learn how to apologize for our actions, and in the future try not to take actions that are going to hurt feelings.
Mod this parent up, please. I can't understand why schools have gotten so trigger-happy nowadays. It's like they believe that suspension or expulsion are the only ways to deal with misbehavior, or even simple mistakes. It's going to leave these children ill-equipped for dealing with mistakes in the future, they'll either be too scared to admit them (for fear of unreasonably harsh punishment) or be unable to understand the difference between a corrective action and a punishment. What's that going to do for them in high school? College? The workforce? For their own families?
It also means that AT&T and Verizon have to start competing on actual service factors, rather than merely existing.
I'm sure Deutsche Telekom would welcome a Google buyout.
I'm not sure you understand how Linux distributions are updated. They have major releases and patches just like Windows.
I feel like this needs a complete Dr. Seuss treatment.
I think that's the trend with many shows having their episodes available the next day on iTunes/Google Play/Amazon Instant Video for a small fee $2-5.
I fail to see what watching a bunch of guys chasing after a ball on a screen does to make me a more well-rounded person.
I suppose trains, cars, buses and ships no longer exist, huh?
Pretty sure men can get breast cancer, too.
If I had mod points, I'd mod you up. NotComcast is the primary reason I pay for DSL.