The problem with "free" public wifi is that it isn't free and it discourages private companies to enter the market. Private industry cannot compete with taxpayer funded agencies; hence government monopoly. I did not mean monopoly by legislation.
I would agree with you, except you're assuming that free-to-the-public, government-funded broadband internet access would be comparable to what we're all paying for right now -- which I'd have to say is highly unlikely at best. More likely, it would be very low-speed compared to 'commercial' broadband, and it would very likely have some sort of censoring on it. I envision it would be, as I've said, better than nothing, but it would be a far cry from what I'm paying $55 per month for right now, for instance; if you wanted faster speeds and no censoring, you'd have to pay a commercial ISP to get it. If you can accept my assumptions for the sake of argument then it would neither be a monopoly nor would it be serious competition for the telcos, because what the government would be offering would be an inferior service.
You complain about the "corporate monopolies", but do you just want to replace it with a government monopoly? How is that any better? The only difference is that you'll have completely inept and/or corrupt people running the monopoly, with little or no check on their powers or budget.
Gee, where did I say I wanted to replace it with a "government monopoly"? That would be an exceedingly stupid idea! Some competition for the telcos probably wouldn't hurt though! And by the way what's so wrong with there being some form of free public internet service for people who can't afford something faster? Even if it was wifi with throughput equivalent to dialup speeds it would be better than nothing for people with limited incomes who can't afford to pay for anything!
...not! I'm not in the least bit surprised, considering that every time someone tries to spearhead any type of free broadband internet access for the American public, it gets shouted down by corporate types from all four corners of the country. After all, we can't have Big Telecom's strangle-hold monopoly on broadband broken by even our puny government, now can we? Wasn't there a U.S. city that recently was sued by a telecom because they had the unmitigated gall to actually make plans to build their own fiber network for use by their residents, because that telecom didn't want to be bothered to build the infrastructure themselves? If you think things are strange now, just wait: I see very stormy times ahead; the War for the Internet is just beginning.
The Australian government listens to the people and to experts on the subject and dumpsterize the whole idea
The Australian government doesn't listen to the people, go ahead with their plan, it fails miserably. Government officials backing the plan are discredited for time and taxpayer money wasted, hopefully are ousted
Either way this sort of ill-conceived idea is discredited even further, and hopefully more governments will take heed and NOT consider it.
I can't see how this is a practical or even a safe idea, really. I've been working in electronics my whole life, and around enough RF to know that high-power RF transmissions on almost any frequency pose health risks, as well as knowing that high-power RF transmitters aren't anywhere near the most power-efficient devices we've ever made, especially as the frequency of operation goes higher.
I'm not a MMORPG player, but I have followed some of this. I don't really see this so much as a bad thing. There is a whole cottage industry out there "farming gold" in these games; doesn't it more or less break the gold-farmers monopoly on the market for Sony to provide a "legal", readily-available way to get currency within the game?
The cool thing about Firefox is that you can basically force users into installing malware by exploiting bug 59314. Just keep popping up a dialogue box (with no way to stop it or switch to another tab) until the user gives in and says yes.
If you're a moron, I guess. I see something do that, and I'm opening Task Manager and killing the entire process manually.
1. search your computer through backdoor built into closed-source operating system.
Great idea. Then a week after release, every cyber-criminal on the planet will have access to any computer they want, no malware or trojan infection necessary. May as well just cancel your internet service after that..
Might I politely suggest that you rethink your prejudiced idea of the 'religious right'? What reason would anybody have to need to know the manner in which you have sex, and what basis do you have for suggesting that these 'religious rightwingers' would care? Frankly, to make such a suggestion is disgusting and quite unfair to the ideology you are attacking.
No, actually, I won't "rethink" it, because history as well as current affairs proves me right over and over again. On the other hand, on the surface at least, you sound to be either grossly uninformed, or you're part of the "religious right". In the latter case, you're either stealthily trying to pass yourself off as Moderate or Progressive. Either that or you're what they refer to in the Intelligence Community as a "useful idiot". Get a clue, sonny; organized religion is all about control.
Really? Is it a crazy law? Go do a Google search for "sex acts illegal in Virginia", and see what you come up with! Here, let me save you the trouble for the first Google hit:
Places where oral sex is illegal: Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Georgia, North and South Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah, Virginia and Washington D.C.
An erection that shows through a man's clothing is illegal in: Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington D.C. and Wisconsin.
In Georgia those charged and convicted for either oral or anal sex can be sentenced to no less than one year and no more than 20 years imprisonment.
And that's just the beginning. Read this for more, and then try to tell me it's a "crazy law" since these are laws in the United States.
Not News: I'm an emotional person. Also Not News: This is an emotional subject. Deal with it, as I'm not going to apologize for being emotional about it.
How about this scenario, then: The religious right manages to get enough power to actually attempt to legislate "morality" (or at least their twisted version of it). They do decide that they need to know what you and your wife are doing in the bedroom. They discover that you're having sex in something other than the missionary position, and what's more, you're using birth control. "No, no!" they say, "That's illegal now, you're going to have to be arrested and punished for that!". So tell me, how do you feel now? Don't sit there and tell me it can't happen, either, since it DOES happen in one form or another somewhere on this planet all the time -- just not in this country, YET. You, sir, don't worry ENOUGH about privacy. If the above doesn't get to you, then let's see what you have to say when identity thieves ruin your life, because some nosy corporation with poor information security measures practically hands someone the keys to your life.
Hooray for anomalies, then; I'm an anomlie, you're an anomalie, don't you want to be an anomalie too?:p
If you say, "I've got nothing to hide!", then you're a moron and you get what you deserve. If you claim that "privacy isn't important", then you must be one of the assholes with something to gain from nosing into people's business, and you should be SHOT.
Come on, people, do you really want the government, corporations, and anybody ELSE who wants to know, to know your most personal things? How long would it be before someone decides they have a legitimate reason to know what sex positions you and your wife like best?
We're closer than we've ever been to living in a fucking police state, don't for one second let yourself think that it's OK!
I don't really like the idea of E-books to start with -- and by the way I resent you calling them "dead tree versions". Buy the paper copy, even if it's used. Download the pirated electronic version if you must.
Wouldn't it be nasty if the outside were hydrophobic and the inside hydrophylic - your sweat would be yanked into the material and violently ejected from the other side! You'd look like your own Vegas water fountain show as you ran along.
Actually I would hope it could be made to do that; it would then make for perfect athletic gear, especially in the rain!
Consider this: your body (brain included!) is one big interconnected system. What affects one part of that system can and often does affect the rest of the system. Start taking better care of your body as well as your mind and I think you'll discover that your mind is still more reliable and flexible than you currently think it is. Eat the right foods with a healthy balance of macronutrients, get enough micronutrients, and please! get enough exercise every week. That covers the physical. For the mental, do the same as professional athletes do for their bodies: crosstrain. Do other things with your brain other than your job -- even if it's crossword puzzles. Involving oneself with making (or at least appreciating!) music on some level awakens parts of the brain that you wouldn't think it could! Learning to play an instrument (BTW: Your voice counts as a musical instrument!) can do wonders for your mental "reach" and flexibility.
Slashdot Mirror
*shrug* I don't agree, and I also don't think anyone could really know how the scenario would pan out until or if it ever comes to pass.
The problem with "free" public wifi is that it isn't free and it discourages private companies to enter the market. Private industry cannot compete with taxpayer funded agencies; hence government monopoly. I did not mean monopoly by legislation.
I would agree with you, except you're assuming that free-to-the-public, government-funded broadband internet access would be comparable to what we're all paying for right now -- which I'd have to say is highly unlikely at best. More likely, it would be very low-speed compared to 'commercial' broadband, and it would very likely have some sort of censoring on it. I envision it would be, as I've said, better than nothing, but it would be a far cry from what I'm paying $55 per month for right now, for instance; if you wanted faster speeds and no censoring, you'd have to pay a commercial ISP to get it. If you can accept my assumptions for the sake of argument then it would neither be a monopoly nor would it be serious competition for the telcos, because what the government would be offering would be an inferior service.
You complain about the "corporate monopolies", but do you just want to replace it with a government monopoly? How is that any better? The only difference is that you'll have completely inept and/or corrupt people running the monopoly, with little or no check on their powers or budget.
Gee, where did I say I wanted to replace it with a "government monopoly"? That would be an exceedingly stupid idea! Some competition for the telcos probably wouldn't hurt though! And by the way what's so wrong with there being some form of free public internet service for people who can't afford something faster? Even if it was wifi with throughput equivalent to dialup speeds it would be better than nothing for people with limited incomes who can't afford to pay for anything!
...not! I'm not in the least bit surprised, considering that every time someone tries to spearhead any type of free broadband internet access for the American public, it gets shouted down by corporate types from all four corners of the country. After all, we can't have Big Telecom's strangle-hold monopoly on broadband broken by even our puny government, now can we? Wasn't there a U.S. city that recently was sued by a telecom because they had the unmitigated gall to actually make plans to build their own fiber network for use by their residents, because that telecom didn't want to be bothered to build the infrastructure themselves? If you think things are strange now, just wait: I see very stormy times ahead; the War for the Internet is just beginning.
Either way this sort of ill-conceived idea is discredited even further, and hopefully more governments will take heed and NOT consider it.
I can't see how this is a practical or even a safe idea, really. I've been working in electronics my whole life, and around enough RF to know that high-power RF transmissions on almost any frequency pose health risks, as well as knowing that high-power RF transmitters aren't anywhere near the most power-efficient devices we've ever made, especially as the frequency of operation goes higher.
I'm not a MMORPG player, but I have followed some of this. I don't really see this so much as a bad thing. There is a whole cottage industry out there "farming gold" in these games; doesn't it more or less break the gold-farmers monopoly on the market for Sony to provide a "legal", readily-available way to get currency within the game?
Was that really necessary to get the story across?
Probably not. I was thinking the same thing. What, did subby vote for McCain? :p
The word would be danegeld (or you might prefer this definition better).
The cool thing about Firefox is that you can basically force users into installing malware by exploiting bug 59314. Just keep popping up a dialogue box (with no way to stop it or switch to another tab) until the user gives in and says yes.
If you're a moron, I guess. I see something do that, and I'm opening Task Manager and killing the entire process manually.
1. search your computer through backdoor built into closed-source operating system.
Great idea. Then a week after release, every cyber-criminal on the planet will have access to any computer they want, no malware or trojan infection necessary. May as well just cancel your internet service after that..
..they'd let you download the game (or at least a playable demo) for free. ;-)
Might I politely suggest that you rethink your prejudiced idea of the 'religious right'? What reason would anybody have to need to know the manner in which you have sex, and what basis do you have for suggesting that these 'religious rightwingers' would care? Frankly, to make such a suggestion is disgusting and quite unfair to the ideology you are attacking.
No, actually, I won't "rethink" it, because history as well as current affairs proves me right over and over again. On the other hand, on the surface at least, you sound to be either grossly uninformed, or you're part of the "religious right". In the latter case, you're either stealthily trying to pass yourself off as Moderate or Progressive. Either that or you're what they refer to in the Intelligence Community as a "useful idiot". Get a clue, sonny; organized religion is all about control.
My point was that you are making up a crazy law..
Really? Is it a crazy law? Go do a Google search for "sex acts illegal in Virginia", and see what you come up with! Here, let me save you the trouble for the first Google hit:
And that's just the beginning. Read this for more, and then try to tell me it's a "crazy law" since these are laws in the United States.
Not News: I'm an emotional person. Also Not News: This is an emotional subject. Deal with it, as I'm not going to apologize for being emotional about it.
I've got nothing to hide. But the Government shouldn't be looking either.
Exactly.
How about this scenario, then: The religious right manages to get enough power to actually attempt to legislate "morality" (or at least their twisted version of it). They do decide that they need to know what you and your wife are doing in the bedroom. They discover that you're having sex in something other than the missionary position, and what's more, you're using birth control. "No, no!" they say, "That's illegal now, you're going to have to be arrested and punished for that!". So tell me, how do you feel now? Don't sit there and tell me it can't happen, either, since it DOES happen in one form or another somewhere on this planet all the time -- just not in this country, YET. You, sir, don't worry ENOUGH about privacy. If the above doesn't get to you, then let's see what you have to say when identity thieves ruin your life, because some nosy corporation with poor information security measures practically hands someone the keys to your life.
Hooray for anomalies, then; I'm an anomlie, you're an anomalie, don't you want to be an anomalie too? :p
If you say, "I've got nothing to hide!", then you're a moron and you get what you deserve. If you claim that "privacy isn't important", then you must be one of the assholes with something to gain from nosing into people's business, and you should be SHOT.
Come on, people, do you really want the government, corporations, and anybody ELSE who wants to know, to know your most personal things? How long would it be before someone decides they have a legitimate reason to know what sex positions you and your wife like best?
We're closer than we've ever been to living in a fucking police state, don't for one second let yourself think that it's OK!
I don't really like the idea of E-books to start with -- and by the way I resent you calling them "dead tree versions". Buy the paper copy, even if it's used. Download the pirated electronic version if you must.
Wouldn't it be nasty if the outside were hydrophobic and the inside hydrophylic - your sweat would be yanked into the material and violently ejected from the other side! You'd look like your own Vegas water fountain show as you ran along.
Actually I would hope it could be made to do that; it would then make for perfect athletic gear, especially in the rain!
Just my $0.02 worth.
..will it run Vista? ;-)