Subtle suggestion noted. Perhaps we can discuss the details of our offering you a superior service sooner rather than later. We would like to propose that in exchange for offering you a faster connection to our consumers, by prioritizing your traffic over others, you openly endorse us as your ISP of choice in the regions we serve. I think you'll agree that we can both come out ahead in this particular arrangement. You of course, will be free to make similar agreements with other ISP in regions that we do not service, and we will not consider this to be an issue.
I've got Verizon FiOS, and though I know it's not that common, but I can get steady 3.7 MB/s streams.
I'm not going to suggest that you are incorrect, but I am going to suggest that your single piece anecdotal evidence is not nearly enough to discredit the report Netflix put together.
I'll start by saying, Cheating in Multiplayer is ridiculous. It ruins the game for everyone, and under no circumstances should be tolerated.
However, as I've gotten older, I've found that I have less and less time to play Video Games, compared to what I used to have. Additionally, since I'm no longer a child, I can afford to buy all the games I want, which means rather than having 2 to 4 new games a year, I have many many more. Sometimes, I enjoy certain aspects of a game, and not others... so I want to skip those aspects I do not enjoy, and get to the aspects I do. Is that wrong in some way? Take Final Fantasy 13 for example. I do not enjoy the battle system, in fact, I hate it. But I enjoyed the story enough to keep it up for a while. Eventually, I just, didn't want to do the battles anymore. I would have liked to see the rest of the story, but I just wasn't having enough fun to justify spending all that time. If I was playing on the PS2, I'd pop in my Gameshark, give myself level 99 or equivalent, and be on my way. I'd be able to get more enjoyment out of the game than I did, and no one else is affected negatively by my cheating. On the PS3 and Xbox 360, that's not an option. It actually detracts from my enjoyment of these games.
I'm aware that this is more a case for alternative game design than it is for openness in console modding, but I wanted to put 2 cents in anyways.
They seem quite desperate to make a buck these days. I wonder if they are really worth 50 billion $. My guess is that they aren't and that we might see a beautiful collapse in the coming years.
The reason people hated it was because people who like physics based sci-fi are not comfortable with meta-physics and fantasy sci-fi or at least don't like it when expecting one and get served the other.
You guys keep talking about the philosophy in the movies, and don't seem to touch base on the films themselves. As far as I am concerned, they were just poorly made films. What about the fact that the plot started making no sense? That from one scene to the next, it became difficult to follow the motivations of any of the characters? That concepts were introduced that had no grounding in anything the viewer already knew, but we're expected to understand anyways. The increasingly arbitrary plot points were harder and harder to get behind. It became more of a chore to understand why Neo did the things he did, or why some of it even mattered. What about the fact that the main "bad guy" from the first movie made a reappearance against all logic, just because he would be a recognizable character, that we already know is bad?
How about the pacing? Between all these arbitrary plot points was a lot of fighting that didn't always make sense. I mean, obviously they are fighting because that guy punched Neo, but beyond that, it's just a fight scene. There is such a thing as an action scene taking TOO long. The Matrix 1 was impressive because they did so much with so little. A simple dodging a bullet shot taken with still cameras was a cultural icon for years to come. A motorcycle chase that went on too long just got boring.
The reason I hated Matrix 2 and 3 had nothing to do with metaphysics, and everything to do with the fact that as films, they were poorly made. In my opinion: they tried too hard to capture what made the Matrix 1 great, and ended up ruining it.
Most consumers will just accept their fate and do nothing (despite the efforts of people trying to get them to stand up), leaving everyone else doomed.
Why do I believe this? I've been stuck with a single ISP for years. If this truly happens, it does not happen in a reasonable amount of time, and I'd rather have a competent government do something about it than wait for a miracle.
It's a self fulfilling prophecy too. It's extremely hard to be motivated towards action when so many apathetic people around you won't lift a finger to help, even when they agree with you or believe in your cause. Everyone knows one person isn't enough to change a corporations ways, so even those who might have been moved to action see the frivolity of it, and end up doing nothing.
It's sad that the above poster can't accept evidence contrary to his world view and that there are enough moderators out there to think this is "+5 Insightful". I suspect I need to get off their lawn.
Welcome to the Internet: where the opinion you already have is the correct one.
In any market, it is always advisable to be aware of what your competition is doing so that you can make sure you are offering a superior, or at least non-inferior, experience. Allowing your competition to stay leaps and bounds ahead of you in any market is a sure fire way to flush your business down the toilet! So who is your competition? Microsoft, and PIRACY. Yes, that's right, Piracy is a competitor, and don't you ever think otherwise. It's a competing distribution method that is cheaper and in some ways more convenient. Hope you have some great plans up your sleeve to prove that buying games is the most hassle free way to go; That buying games gets you a BETTER product!
Let's take a look at what the you and your competition are up to shall we... oh, it looks like none of you require a constant Internet connection to play games, so you're all on the same page there. Wait, what? You WANT to introduce that? Won't that put you in a WORSE position than your competitors on the level of convenience offered by your product? What if people have flaky Internet, or god forbid, NO Internet! Fuck them you say? Oh, well, okay. I'm going to have to deduct you a few points for that one.
Let's see... no one has CD key's either, so that's nice... wait, WHAT again!? You actually WANT to introduce these!? What if people lose their keys, or want to rent video games before buying? Fuck them you say? Welllll okay, it's YOUR business Sony. Of course, I'm going to have to deduct more points yet again...
You know Sony, you're not really selling me on why I want to buy from you here. What? Fuck me you say? You know, I'll remember that.
This is the kind of crap that keeps people from thinking straight. Video games do affect people. If you play them every now and then its normal. BUT if you play them to the point where you can't pry yourself away from them, then you have problems. For example if I eat like a pig and can't stop eating nobody would ever say, "oh no problem there." Or if you read, read, and read, and read to the point where you drone out reality everybody would say, "oh there is a problem." So why on this green earth can't people in slashdot admit that if you overdose on gaming then you have a problem!!!! Addiction, is an addiction and gaming is a vent for that addiction.
While you are completely correct, the fear is that overzealous politicians are going to jump on the hate Video Games bandwagon (based on shoddy at best Scientific Papers) in order to push out some kind of anti "violent" video game law. That this will lead to heavy regulations in the industry, possibly stifling creativity or hampering a game from containing a potent message about violence, or any number of other things. Addiction is addiction, but Bad Science is Bad Science. A study that incorrectly identifies everyone it can as being addicted in order to make Video Games look bad, is not helping anyone truly addicted to Video Games. To further your own analogy, if people saw someone addicted to reading, they wouldn't jump on reading as a medium being at fault, but the past has shown this what happens with Video Games. As such, there is a much louder voice, here and elsewhere, trying to assert that Video Games are not at fault for the addiction. That the person is at "fault" (if you can call it that) and should seek help.
Justice now is one-way only? And nore interesting, always on the side of the stronger? Strange, I suppose the whole idea of "justice" is protect the weak from the stronger...
Justice is justice, as defined by those who currently hold power. If the Civil War had gone the other way, it would have been Justice that kept the slaves in line. If the Revolution had gone the other way, it would have been Justice that upheld the British Empire's hold on the Colonies.
This is a direct result of Netflix hitting the Canadian market a few months ago as it competes directly with Rogers and Bell, the two largest ISPs who happen to also be the two largest cable and satellite providers. Netflix HD movies take around 4GB each and a couple hours of TV programs is about the same. If you are in the habit of watching two hours of TV a night then you'll easily go over 100GB in a month. Bell wants to blame this on piracy but the fact of the matter is that this is perfectly legal and normal usage.
Full Disclosure: I previously worked for Shaw Cable in Technical Support: Specifically in AUP for some time, dealing with this exact topic.
First off, the largest ISP is very relative to where you are. Here in Western Canada, Bell and Rogers are not even true options. Shaw Cablesystems is pretty much the only company that owns any Coax out here, and Telus is the local incumbent telephone and DSL provider. Shaw has had the same caps for the past like 5 years, and the current ones are clearly listed for all to see right here:
Aside from the limits not changing much in at least 5 years, possibly more, they have had some form of limits in place for well over 10 years. Before they implemented the DOCSIS network, the maximum speed offered per modem was 5 Mbps, with a monthly cap of 20gigabytes. When they introduced Docsis, they also introduced faster plans for 10 dollars more, up to 10 Mbps, and 60gigs per month. Those limits themselves have gone up over the years (I'm sure along with inflation of the prices), to now be sitting at a monthly cap of 60 gigs and 100 gigs respectively.
Not liking monthly caps is one thing, but trying to claim this is a new phenomenon is just inaccurate.
Its insane just to think that you actually need a weapon at home.
Your naivete is almost endearing but the reality is this: it's insane to think that you are immune from the consequences of a home invasion.
Pray it never happens to you, because if it does, you'll wish you had a trigger to pull.
Because killing someone in order to protect your stuff from being stole is perfectly reasonable?
In the USA, our cities which have the strictest gun control laws, are the cities which have the highest homicide rates. Furthermore, our homicides which involve firearms, seldom involve firearms which are legally possessed.
There are no borders when you cross from one city to another. Gun Control in one city, when you can go 5 cities over to get one doesn't mean much, especially to organized crime. The issue is, that American society as a whole, owns guns. If you create a single little section that doesn't have guns, they are surely at a disadvantage to the rest of their own society, but don't let that fool you into thinking that less guns means more murder. It's the fact that the rest of your society has so many guns, not that one small part that doesn't.
Its insane just to think that you actually need a weapon at home.
Your naivete is almost endearing but the reality is this: it's insane to think that you are immune from the consequences of a home invasion.
Pray it never happens to you, because if it does, you'll wish you had a trigger to pull.
This is the line of thought that confuses me. I live in Canada, and I do not know a single person in real life, who owns a Handgun. I think I might know 1 or 2 people who own hunting rifles, but I've never seen them personally. I had n discussion with an American friend who said he thought it was crazy I didn't have a gun for that exact reason, a home invasion. He's never been the victim of home invasion, nor have I, nor have either of us been able to recall a single incident where it happened to someone we knew. That isn't to say it never happens but...
His point was that he needed a gun so that the invader wouldn't be able to shoot him first, because he certainly would, so as to not be able to have anyone identify him. I argued that the difference between Home Invasion and Murder are pretty large with regards to the amount of police investigating your crime. I also argued that it's possible a person breaking into his house would find it easier to procure a gun than someone up here, but not only that, he would have to ASSUME that the man who's house he was breaking into also had a gun, and needed to be shot before he could be shot himself. Where as here, it is generally assumed that people do NOT own guns, so a home invader doesn't need to carry a gun to break into someones house to begin with, and if he DOES carry a gun, does not need to be as edgy about a shootout, ergo, less chance of someone being shot.
You seem to think you need a gun to protect yourself in the society you live in, but what are you protecting yourself from? All the other people in your society who own guns.
I was a Mac user until recently, and an Apple II user before I started with Macs. But lately, I just absolutely refuse to use anything with their brand on it because of this precise behavior.
All I ask is that the device I pay for allow me to use it as I please instead of requiring the company's permission for each little chunk of code that executes. Give me just that and I'll be happy to buy.
It's for that reason exactly that I really regret my purchase of an iPhone. The simple things I want to do with it are locked down (add my own new text tones), and the improvements I try to make in my experience with my device are disallowed (downgrade to an older firmware that ran faster).
Apple stuff is User friendly, but it's certainly not Tech friendly at all. If you're the type of person who wants to do something with your product that isn't already done for you by them, you're screwed.
The thing about XP, it's familiar and simple. People are just so use to it. My experience with Windows 7 is that things aren't where they use to be. So, maybe that's the issue.
Now, for the fun part of this post. Anyone here hanging onto unused copies of XP just incase you decide to build a new machine? I know I am.
I hold on to old OS' in case I have to do work on an OLD machine, not a new one. I don't plan on installing XP on a brand new machine any more than I was installing Windows 2000 on a new machine when I had XP. I'm not saying upgrading blindly for the sake of upgrading is the way to go, but Windows 7 is straight up more stable than XP in all of my experiences. It's a pleasure to install on new machines, since it handles most drivers on it's own, it has better security, doesn't let people use IE6, and I haven't had a single client (personal use computers) have any concerns or issues that stemmed from Windows 7. Even users who had gone from Windows XP to Windows 7 didn't take that long to acclimatize.
Speaking of Apple, let me talk about the iPhone for a moment. This anecdote may seem long, but I promise there is a point to be made.
I have an iPhone 3g, it's the only piece of Apple hardware I own. I was relatively satisfied with it's performance (aside the fact that they don't let you change system sounds to your liking, a minor annoyance, but a perfect example of how Apple does not let go of it's stranglehold it has on how you can or can't use your device), but then Firmware 4.0 came out. I upgraded to it because well, why not upgrade to new firmware? iTunes bugs the hell out of you till you do, and some new versions of the Apps you have stop working if you don't, so really, they don't want you to have a choice in the matter. So I upgrade.
Instantly the device slows to a crawl... I think maybe I've done something wrong so I restore... same problem. So I look for background things to shut off, I find some advice, it didn't help. Eventually as I keep reading, I discover that this Firmware is really not great for the iPhone 3g, as the 3g does not have the same amount of processing power as the iPhone 4 or the 3gs, so the new things they added that run in the background slow things down. Fine, I'll downgrade back to 3.1.3, I was happy enough there. Only... there is no way to downgrade back. At least, no Mac Support way to do it. I tried everything to downgrade back to that firmware within the bounds of the iTunes program, it's just not possible. So I did it the old fashioned way, with a guide from a jailbreak site. Got it downgraded, couldn't restore my contacts because my backup version said 4.0 and I was on 3.1.3... Now Apple is PUNISHING me for downgrading my Firmware by holding my Data hostage! So I tried to get my contacts out manually... There is no way to do this. Even if you didn't encrypt your data, it is unreadable (unless you've been uploading your contacts somewhere, or you have "Time Machine", but I don't own a mac). God forbid I lost my phone, I'd never get those numbers back again. I read horror stories while trying to find a way to get these contacts back from people in that situation. I considered myself LUCKY I still had my phone while I was trying to find these contacts. So I had to upgrade BACK to the latest firmware, write down my numbers, downgrade again, and put the numbers back on!
At that point, why the fuck not jailbreak? It's not any more work from what I'm already doing, and look at that, suddenly there were programs going out of their way to help! It was easier to freaking jailbreak the damn thing than it was to downgrade to an official firmware version! This brings me around to my point. I don't like Apple (obviously). Their hardware is relatively well built, and they have good ideas how to use it, but their insistence on never letting go of your device after you've bought it, their unwavering refusal to let you make your own decisions makes their products a nightmare to work with. The fact that they created a firmware that didn't run efficiently on all devices they put it out to is bad enough (read: unacceptable to me), but to not let you downgrade if you felt you were better off, and then to hold data hostage for doing that... these to me are far FAR worse decisions with regards to how their company is perceived than how their customer support is handled. The point at which my situation changes from a Normal user to a Techy User, is when I actually when through the trouble of the downgrade, a normal user would have felt stuck with the new firmware, and that's pretty ridiculous in and of itself.
Suffice it to say, that I will not be purchasing another iPhone when this one breaks.
While I get that one of the biggest ways to discredit a politician is to dig up their old voting records and point out some heavy hypocrisy, I don't understand why it's not acceptable for a politician to change his mind. He voted to censor the Internet in the past, but now he's petitioning to prevent such a thing... I see this as nothing but a good thing. There is a difference between this, and him saying "I'm going to vote X on Prop 1234" and then voting Y on prop 1234. That's lying about his intentions. This is a change of heart.
But I don't do anything that revolves around audio.
Of course 99.5% of the people who claim to be audiophiles and claim they can 'tell the difference' don't need one either. Its just a different type of epenis.
What's it called when you belittle a group of enthusiasts who are interested in something that you admit to knowing almost absolutely nothing about? Still epenis or is that something different entirely?
I'm not an audiophile, but I don't have to be to find your telling people what they can or cannot "tell" to be pretty damn ignorant. You either seem to think that A) They cannot tell the difference and are lying/tricking themselves or B) There is a difference but it is so minute that it is not worth fussing over. If A, then who are you to tell someone what they can or cannot hear? If you're seriously trying to claim that you know better than they do what they are hearing, you're an idiot. If B, then who are you to tell someone what is important and what is not? Just because their priorities are different than yours doesn't make you right.
The fact that you got modded to 5:Insightful is what really irks me. It's that "I haven't put any effort into learning about this topic, but I'm going to belittle it from the sidelines" attitude, followed by the rest of the community nodding with conviction right along side you that pisses me off.
Slashdot Mirror
Cause you know, I like my smart phones to be able to make phone calls. It's just one of those things I do with them.
Dear Netflix,
Subtle suggestion noted. Perhaps we can discuss the details of our offering you a superior service sooner rather than later. We would like to propose that in exchange for offering you a faster connection to our consumers, by prioritizing your traffic over others, you openly endorse us as your ISP of choice in the regions we serve. I think you'll agree that we can both come out ahead in this particular arrangement. You of course, will be free to make similar agreements with other ISP in regions that we do not service, and we will not consider this to be an issue.
Yours Truly, [Insert ISP Here]
I've got Verizon FiOS, and though I know it's not that common, but I can get steady 3.7 MB/s streams.
I'm not going to suggest that you are incorrect, but I am going to suggest that your single piece anecdotal evidence is not nearly enough to discredit the report Netflix put together.
I'll start by saying, Cheating in Multiplayer is ridiculous. It ruins the game for everyone, and under no circumstances should be tolerated. However, as I've gotten older, I've found that I have less and less time to play Video Games, compared to what I used to have. Additionally, since I'm no longer a child, I can afford to buy all the games I want, which means rather than having 2 to 4 new games a year, I have many many more. Sometimes, I enjoy certain aspects of a game, and not others... so I want to skip those aspects I do not enjoy, and get to the aspects I do. Is that wrong in some way? Take Final Fantasy 13 for example. I do not enjoy the battle system, in fact, I hate it. But I enjoyed the story enough to keep it up for a while. Eventually, I just, didn't want to do the battles anymore. I would have liked to see the rest of the story, but I just wasn't having enough fun to justify spending all that time. If I was playing on the PS2, I'd pop in my Gameshark, give myself level 99 or equivalent, and be on my way. I'd be able to get more enjoyment out of the game than I did, and no one else is affected negatively by my cheating. On the PS3 and Xbox 360, that's not an option. It actually detracts from my enjoyment of these games. I'm aware that this is more a case for alternative game design than it is for openness in console modding, but I wanted to put 2 cents in anyways.
Jeez, I feel old.
I suspect that is because you are. *tramples all over your lawn*
They seem quite desperate to make a buck these days. I wonder if they are really worth 50 billion $. My guess is that they aren't and that we might see a beautiful collapse in the coming years.
I truly wish I could believe you.
The reason people hated it was because people who like physics based sci-fi are not comfortable with meta-physics and fantasy sci-fi or at least don't like it when expecting one and get served the other.
You guys keep talking about the philosophy in the movies, and don't seem to touch base on the films themselves. As far as I am concerned, they were just poorly made films. What about the fact that the plot started making no sense? That from one scene to the next, it became difficult to follow the motivations of any of the characters? That concepts were introduced that had no grounding in anything the viewer already knew, but we're expected to understand anyways. The increasingly arbitrary plot points were harder and harder to get behind. It became more of a chore to understand why Neo did the things he did, or why some of it even mattered. What about the fact that the main "bad guy" from the first movie made a reappearance against all logic, just because he would be a recognizable character, that we already know is bad?
How about the pacing? Between all these arbitrary plot points was a lot of fighting that didn't always make sense. I mean, obviously they are fighting because that guy punched Neo, but beyond that, it's just a fight scene. There is such a thing as an action scene taking TOO long. The Matrix 1 was impressive because they did so much with so little. A simple dodging a bullet shot taken with still cameras was a cultural icon for years to come. A motorcycle chase that went on too long just got boring.
The reason I hated Matrix 2 and 3 had nothing to do with metaphysics, and everything to do with the fact that as films, they were poorly made. In my opinion: they tried too hard to capture what made the Matrix 1 great, and ended up ruining it.
Most consumers will just accept their fate and do nothing (despite the efforts of people trying to get them to stand up), leaving everyone else doomed.
Why do I believe this? I've been stuck with a single ISP for years. If this truly happens, it does not happen in a reasonable amount of time, and I'd rather have a competent government do something about it than wait for a miracle.
It's a self fulfilling prophecy too. It's extremely hard to be motivated towards action when so many apathetic people around you won't lift a finger to help, even when they agree with you or believe in your cause. Everyone knows one person isn't enough to change a corporations ways, so even those who might have been moved to action see the frivolity of it, and end up doing nothing.
It's sad that the above poster can't accept evidence contrary to his world view and that there are enough moderators out there to think this is "+5 Insightful". I suspect I need to get off their lawn.
Welcome to the Internet: where the opinion you already have is the correct one.
Oh Steve, people can make up statistics to prove anything. 14 % of all people know that.
In any market, it is always advisable to be aware of what your competition is doing so that you can make sure you are offering a superior, or at least non-inferior, experience. Allowing your competition to stay leaps and bounds ahead of you in any market is a sure fire way to flush your business down the toilet! So who is your competition? Microsoft, and PIRACY. Yes, that's right, Piracy is a competitor, and don't you ever think otherwise. It's a competing distribution method that is cheaper and in some ways more convenient. Hope you have some great plans up your sleeve to prove that buying games is the most hassle free way to go; That buying games gets you a BETTER product!
Let's take a look at what the you and your competition are up to shall we... oh, it looks like none of you require a constant Internet connection to play games, so you're all on the same page there. Wait, what? You WANT to introduce that? Won't that put you in a WORSE position than your competitors on the level of convenience offered by your product? What if people have flaky Internet, or god forbid, NO Internet! Fuck them you say? Oh, well, okay. I'm going to have to deduct you a few points for that one.
Let's see... no one has CD key's either, so that's nice... wait, WHAT again!? You actually WANT to introduce these!? What if people lose their keys, or want to rent video games before buying? Fuck them you say? Welllll okay, it's YOUR business Sony. Of course, I'm going to have to deduct more points yet again...
You know Sony, you're not really selling me on why I want to buy from you here. What? Fuck me you say? You know, I'll remember that.
This is the kind of crap that keeps people from thinking straight. Video games do affect people. If you play them every now and then its normal. BUT if you play them to the point where you can't pry yourself away from them, then you have problems. For example if I eat like a pig and can't stop eating nobody would ever say, "oh no problem there." Or if you read, read, and read, and read to the point where you drone out reality everybody would say, "oh there is a problem." So why on this green earth can't people in slashdot admit that if you overdose on gaming then you have a problem!!!! Addiction, is an addiction and gaming is a vent for that addiction.
While you are completely correct, the fear is that overzealous politicians are going to jump on the hate Video Games bandwagon (based on shoddy at best Scientific Papers) in order to push out some kind of anti "violent" video game law. That this will lead to heavy regulations in the industry, possibly stifling creativity or hampering a game from containing a potent message about violence, or any number of other things. Addiction is addiction, but Bad Science is Bad Science. A study that incorrectly identifies everyone it can as being addicted in order to make Video Games look bad, is not helping anyone truly addicted to Video Games. To further your own analogy, if people saw someone addicted to reading, they wouldn't jump on reading as a medium being at fault, but the past has shown this what happens with Video Games. As such, there is a much louder voice, here and elsewhere, trying to assert that Video Games are not at fault for the addiction. That the person is at "fault" (if you can call it that) and should seek help.
Justice now is one-way only? And nore interesting, always on the side of the stronger? Strange, I suppose the whole idea of "justice" is protect the weak from the stronger...
Justice is justice, as defined by those who currently hold power. If the Civil War had gone the other way, it would have been Justice that kept the slaves in line. If the Revolution had gone the other way, it would have been Justice that upheld the British Empire's hold on the Colonies.
Seriously, aren't we overdue for an Ice Age? Maybe we've indirectly saved ourselves from thousands of years of frozen tundra!
This is a direct result of Netflix hitting the Canadian market a few months ago as it competes directly with Rogers and Bell, the two largest ISPs who happen to also be the two largest cable and satellite providers. Netflix HD movies take around 4GB each and a couple hours of TV programs is about the same. If you are in the habit of watching two hours of TV a night then you'll easily go over 100GB in a month. Bell wants to blame this on piracy but the fact of the matter is that this is perfectly legal and normal usage.
Full Disclosure: I previously worked for Shaw Cable in Technical Support: Specifically in AUP for some time, dealing with this exact topic.
First off, the largest ISP is very relative to where you are. Here in Western Canada, Bell and Rogers are not even true options. Shaw Cablesystems is pretty much the only company that owns any Coax out here, and Telus is the local incumbent telephone and DSL provider. Shaw has had the same caps for the past like 5 years, and the current ones are clearly listed for all to see right here:
http://www.shaw.ca/en-ca/ProductsServices/Internet/newdatausage?utm_source=shawca&utm_medium=textlink&utm_content=extremelanding&utm_campaign=datausage.
Aside from the limits not changing much in at least 5 years, possibly more, they have had some form of limits in place for well over 10 years. Before they implemented the DOCSIS network, the maximum speed offered per modem was 5 Mbps, with a monthly cap of 20gigabytes. When they introduced Docsis, they also introduced faster plans for 10 dollars more, up to 10 Mbps, and 60gigs per month. Those limits themselves have gone up over the years (I'm sure along with inflation of the prices), to now be sitting at a monthly cap of 60 gigs and 100 gigs respectively.
Not liking monthly caps is one thing, but trying to claim this is a new phenomenon is just inaccurate.
Its insane just to think that you actually need a weapon at home.
Your naivete is almost endearing but the reality is this: it's insane to think that you are immune from the consequences of a home invasion. Pray it never happens to you, because if it does, you'll wish you had a trigger to pull.
Because killing someone in order to protect your stuff from being stole is perfectly reasonable?
In the USA, our cities which have the strictest gun control laws, are the cities which have the highest homicide rates. Furthermore, our homicides which involve firearms, seldom involve firearms which are legally possessed.
There are no borders when you cross from one city to another. Gun Control in one city, when you can go 5 cities over to get one doesn't mean much, especially to organized crime. The issue is, that American society as a whole, owns guns. If you create a single little section that doesn't have guns, they are surely at a disadvantage to the rest of their own society, but don't let that fool you into thinking that less guns means more murder. It's the fact that the rest of your society has so many guns, not that one small part that doesn't.
Its insane just to think that you actually need a weapon at home.
Your naivete is almost endearing but the reality is this: it's insane to think that you are immune from the consequences of a home invasion. Pray it never happens to you, because if it does, you'll wish you had a trigger to pull.
This is the line of thought that confuses me. I live in Canada, and I do not know a single person in real life, who owns a Handgun. I think I might know 1 or 2 people who own hunting rifles, but I've never seen them personally. I had n discussion with an American friend who said he thought it was crazy I didn't have a gun for that exact reason, a home invasion. He's never been the victim of home invasion, nor have I, nor have either of us been able to recall a single incident where it happened to someone we knew. That isn't to say it never happens but...
His point was that he needed a gun so that the invader wouldn't be able to shoot him first, because he certainly would, so as to not be able to have anyone identify him. I argued that the difference between Home Invasion and Murder are pretty large with regards to the amount of police investigating your crime. I also argued that it's possible a person breaking into his house would find it easier to procure a gun than someone up here, but not only that, he would have to ASSUME that the man who's house he was breaking into also had a gun, and needed to be shot before he could be shot himself. Where as here, it is generally assumed that people do NOT own guns, so a home invader doesn't need to carry a gun to break into someones house to begin with, and if he DOES carry a gun, does not need to be as edgy about a shootout, ergo, less chance of someone being shot.
You seem to think you need a gun to protect yourself in the society you live in, but what are you protecting yourself from? All the other people in your society who own guns.
I was a Mac user until recently, and an Apple II user before I started with Macs. But lately, I just absolutely refuse to use anything with their brand on it because of this precise behavior. All I ask is that the device I pay for allow me to use it as I please instead of requiring the company's permission for each little chunk of code that executes. Give me just that and I'll be happy to buy.
It's for that reason exactly that I really regret my purchase of an iPhone. The simple things I want to do with it are locked down (add my own new text tones), and the improvements I try to make in my experience with my device are disallowed (downgrade to an older firmware that ran faster). Apple stuff is User friendly, but it's certainly not Tech friendly at all. If you're the type of person who wants to do something with your product that isn't already done for you by them, you're screwed.
The thing about XP, it's familiar and simple. People are just so use to it. My experience with Windows 7 is that things aren't where they use to be. So, maybe that's the issue.
Now, for the fun part of this post. Anyone here hanging onto unused copies of XP just incase you decide to build a new machine? I know I am.
I hold on to old OS' in case I have to do work on an OLD machine, not a new one. I don't plan on installing XP on a brand new machine any more than I was installing Windows 2000 on a new machine when I had XP. I'm not saying upgrading blindly for the sake of upgrading is the way to go, but Windows 7 is straight up more stable than XP in all of my experiences. It's a pleasure to install on new machines, since it handles most drivers on it's own, it has better security, doesn't let people use IE6, and I haven't had a single client (personal use computers) have any concerns or issues that stemmed from Windows 7. Even users who had gone from Windows XP to Windows 7 didn't take that long to acclimatize.
Speaking of Apple, let me talk about the iPhone for a moment. This anecdote may seem long, but I promise there is a point to be made.
I have an iPhone 3g, it's the only piece of Apple hardware I own. I was relatively satisfied with it's performance (aside the fact that they don't let you change system sounds to your liking, a minor annoyance, but a perfect example of how Apple does not let go of it's stranglehold it has on how you can or can't use your device), but then Firmware 4.0 came out. I upgraded to it because well, why not upgrade to new firmware? iTunes bugs the hell out of you till you do, and some new versions of the Apps you have stop working if you don't, so really, they don't want you to have a choice in the matter. So I upgrade.
Instantly the device slows to a crawl... I think maybe I've done something wrong so I restore... same problem. So I look for background things to shut off, I find some advice, it didn't help. Eventually as I keep reading, I discover that this Firmware is really not great for the iPhone 3g, as the 3g does not have the same amount of processing power as the iPhone 4 or the 3gs, so the new things they added that run in the background slow things down. Fine, I'll downgrade back to 3.1.3, I was happy enough there. Only... there is no way to downgrade back. At least, no Mac Support way to do it. I tried everything to downgrade back to that firmware within the bounds of the iTunes program, it's just not possible. So I did it the old fashioned way, with a guide from a jailbreak site. Got it downgraded, couldn't restore my contacts because my backup version said 4.0 and I was on 3.1.3... Now Apple is PUNISHING me for downgrading my Firmware by holding my Data hostage! So I tried to get my contacts out manually... There is no way to do this. Even if you didn't encrypt your data, it is unreadable (unless you've been uploading your contacts somewhere, or you have "Time Machine", but I don't own a mac). God forbid I lost my phone, I'd never get those numbers back again. I read horror stories while trying to find a way to get these contacts back from people in that situation. I considered myself LUCKY I still had my phone while I was trying to find these contacts. So I had to upgrade BACK to the latest firmware, write down my numbers, downgrade again, and put the numbers back on!
At that point, why the fuck not jailbreak? It's not any more work from what I'm already doing, and look at that, suddenly there were programs going out of their way to help! It was easier to freaking jailbreak the damn thing than it was to downgrade to an official firmware version! This brings me around to my point. I don't like Apple (obviously). Their hardware is relatively well built, and they have good ideas how to use it, but their insistence on never letting go of your device after you've bought it, their unwavering refusal to let you make your own decisions makes their products a nightmare to work with. The fact that they created a firmware that didn't run efficiently on all devices they put it out to is bad enough (read: unacceptable to me), but to not let you downgrade if you felt you were better off, and then to hold data hostage for doing that... these to me are far FAR worse decisions with regards to how their company is perceived than how their customer support is handled. The point at which my situation changes from a Normal user to a Techy User, is when I actually when through the trouble of the downgrade, a normal user would have felt stuck with the new firmware, and that's pretty ridiculous in and of itself.
Suffice it to say, that I will not be purchasing another iPhone when this one breaks.
just out of interest
how do you know that the number of undiscovered species is in the thousands?
Indeed, how DO we know even approximately how many undiscovered species there are? That seems like a pretty wild shot in the dark.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101118/10291211924/the-19-senators-who-voted-to-censor-the-internet.shtml
While I get that one of the biggest ways to discredit a politician is to dig up their old voting records and point out some heavy hypocrisy, I don't understand why it's not acceptable for a politician to change his mind. He voted to censor the Internet in the past, but now he's petitioning to prevent such a thing... I see this as nothing but a good thing. There is a difference between this, and him saying "I'm going to vote X on Prop 1234" and then voting Y on prop 1234. That's lying about his intentions. This is a change of heart.
How do you differentiate a DDoS attack from the usual slashdotting of a web site?
One is intentionally malicious with the intent to bring down the site. The other is usually the Botnet on Autopilot.
I don't.
But I don't do anything that revolves around audio.
Of course 99.5% of the people who claim to be audiophiles and claim they can 'tell the difference' don't need one either. Its just a different type of epenis.
What's it called when you belittle a group of enthusiasts who are interested in something that you admit to knowing almost absolutely nothing about? Still epenis or is that something different entirely?
I'm not an audiophile, but I don't have to be to find your telling people what they can or cannot "tell" to be pretty damn ignorant. You either seem to think that A) They cannot tell the difference and are lying/tricking themselves or B) There is a difference but it is so minute that it is not worth fussing over. If A, then who are you to tell someone what they can or cannot hear? If you're seriously trying to claim that you know better than they do what they are hearing, you're an idiot. If B, then who are you to tell someone what is important and what is not? Just because their priorities are different than yours doesn't make you right.
The fact that you got modded to 5:Insightful is what really irks me. It's that "I haven't put any effort into learning about this topic, but I'm going to belittle it from the sidelines" attitude, followed by the rest of the community nodding with conviction right along side you that pisses me off.