You do realize Brin and Page alone control over 50% of the voting stock, and if you add in Schmidt it's evident no one has any control but the founders and Schmidt.
Yeah that's the main thing I'm worried about. In 30 years after Brin and Page step down, then what? Will they give their companies to their sons? The history of hereditary rule frowns on the likelihood of that turning out well.
Funny that you say that, considering ever since Reagen Republicans have done far more to increase the size of government and our national debt than Democrats. So what *is* your stake in Republicans exactly?
You do realize Verizon has ended its rollout of FIOS, right? The only reason it began the program was because of IVan Seidenberg's competitive nature, but now that he's retiring (thank the shareholders who wanted him out), his successors are ending the FIOS rollout.
Aside from the fact that the FCC's goal is idiotically unambitious and for show because cable companies' upgrade to DOCSIS 3 would bring 100mbit to 100+ million even without any government interference by 2020, you *will* be provided with an option for higher upload speeds from your cable provider. Currently upstream bonding is still being tested, but the cable co's are just about finished testing it out and will be ready to roll it out soon (as in near the end of this year or start of next year).
Government imposed local monopolies were abolished years ago. The % limit you cite for cable companies was abolished last year due to litigation against the FCC run by... Comcast... maybe? I can't remember off the top of my head. Anyways no cable company overbuilds into a competitor's territory. That would be financially stupid for them. Instead they just buy competitors.
Who builds the courtrooms you idiot? Who pays the salaries of the judges? Are you really that retarded? "Thievery"? Get off your high horse and look at the world around you, my god.
Too bad what you're saying is a complete lie. Wiring rural areas is not a financial loss, but simply a lower return on Investment. Providing broadband is ultra cheap. The real cost is in the initial buildout of the network. That's the difficulty here.
And then...you can vote them out if they do something people really don't like, which you can't do with a corporation. Or did you forget that you can vote?
The real issue is that Genachowski took strong government action off the table very early in the adoption of the plan. In some ways it's understandable, as the FCC has no real power to enforce anything (as Comcast's ongoing litigation of the FCC's penalty on them for throttling customer P2P traffic demonstrates), and must even have this plan approved by Congress. Yet this pale, pathetic imitation of "change" is already being denounced by Republicans. The political atmosphere in Washington simply isn't in the FCC's favor right now.
Except that it costs $8/month for an ISP to actually provide broadband, and that $8 covers all their costs, not their costs of bandwidth, which is more like $1/month/customer. The issue is one of competition, which is impossible in an infrastructure heavy industry where duopolies rule the land. That's why regulation implementing a mechanism for competition, like line-sharing, is necessary, and anti-trust along with strong government action would do wonders for the industry.
I've been following news and speculation surrounding the plan for the better part of a year now. There were numerous tell-tale signs that this was going to be a flop, like Blair Levin, the head of the NBP team, discounting the importance of line-sharing, despite it being touted as the single-most effective means of promoting competition in the ISP industry by a Harvard-Berkman study commissioned by the FCC.
Also, Dave Burstein is amazing. The guy knows more about telecom than anyone else in Washington. I highly recommend you read his website at DSLPrime.com
Really? You think Republicans were simply mincing on words and in fact arguing that the "end effects" of the bill would result in death panels? Are you seriously that crazy? Where in god's name in the health bill does it say death panels will be set up, or Grandma is going to die at the hands of the government? It's up to the perpetrators of the claim to prove themselves.
See, I understand certain aspects of progressivism, but I think in some cases it goes too far. While I'm economically progressive, I'm socially conservative. I look at women and see them working full-time, only stopping work to care for their children until they're 6 months or 1 year old, and I can't help but feel depressed at the state of "progressive" nations.
Equality is fine if two quantities are indeed equal, but humans are *not* all equal. We didn't evolve that way, and our psychologies do not fit into such rigid idealistic categorization. In fact it is quite effectively argued that modern law favors females over males, given the natural differences between the two that are not accounted for by law.
I didn't mean for this to descend into a male vs. female rant. What I'm trying to say is that "progressive" societies have become materialistic and ignored many of the spiritual and emotional benefits of traditional societies. Values preached in philosophies such as Buddhism or Confucianism are simply thrown to the wayside to focus on the material well-being of everyone.
This might seem good on the surface, but underneath I feel that things are lacking.
Except...he's let the banks and Wall Street get away with every crime they committed that resulted in our economy nearly falling off a precipice. His banking reforms are pathetic cop-outs to Wall Street, and nothing has changed in that sector. He reappointed Timothy Geithner as Treasury head and had him write the reforms, which is just insane as the guy is pure evil.
To quote/paraphrase Jon Stewart, I can't tell if Obama is Obiwan playing chess on a 3D board while everyone else is stuck in 2D, or if he's getting the snot beat out of him.
Slashdot Mirror
It's funny that you say that, considering neocons have done far more to grow government and massively pile up our national debt than Democrats have.
I tried reading your post but I ran out of breath due to a lack of punctuation.
You do realize Brin and Page alone control over 50% of the voting stock, and if you add in Schmidt it's evident no one has any control but the founders and Schmidt.
Yeah that's the main thing I'm worried about. In 30 years after Brin and Page step down, then what? Will they give their companies to their sons? The history of hereditary rule frowns on the likelihood of that turning out well.
Just how long did you people spend coming up with those anagrams?
Interestingly, social psychology studies have demonstrated atheists are in fact quite similar to the strongly religious.
Funny that you say that, considering ever since Reagen Republicans have done far more to increase the size of government and our national debt than Democrats. So what *is* your stake in Republicans exactly?
It's on arstechnica. 50 micrometers.
You do realize Verizon has ended its rollout of FIOS, right? The only reason it began the program was because of IVan Seidenberg's competitive nature, but now that he's retiring (thank the shareholders who wanted him out), his successors are ending the FIOS rollout.
You must be great at parties.
I felt like bashing my head against a wall out of pure shame for humanity.
Aside from the fact that the FCC's goal is idiotically unambitious and for show because cable companies' upgrade to DOCSIS 3 would bring 100mbit to 100+ million even without any government interference by 2020, you *will* be provided with an option for higher upload speeds from your cable provider. Currently upstream bonding is still being tested, but the cable co's are just about finished testing it out and will be ready to roll it out soon (as in near the end of this year or start of next year).
Government imposed local monopolies were abolished years ago. The % limit you cite for cable companies was abolished last year due to litigation against the FCC run by... Comcast... maybe? I can't remember off the top of my head. Anyways no cable company overbuilds into a competitor's territory. That would be financially stupid for them. Instead they just buy competitors.
Who builds the courtrooms you idiot? Who pays the salaries of the judges? Are you really that retarded? "Thievery"? Get off your high horse and look at the world around you, my god.
Too bad what you're saying is a complete lie. Wiring rural areas is not a financial loss, but simply a lower return on Investment. Providing broadband is ultra cheap. The real cost is in the initial buildout of the network. That's the difficulty here.
And then...you can vote them out if they do something people really don't like, which you can't do with a corporation. Or did you forget that you can vote?
YES! Ever since the announcement of Civ 5 I decided to give Civ 4 another "go" at it, and was sucked into another week-long addiction. AAauggh!
The real issue is that Genachowski took strong government action off the table very early in the adoption of the plan. In some ways it's understandable, as the FCC has no real power to enforce anything (as Comcast's ongoing litigation of the FCC's penalty on them for throttling customer P2P traffic demonstrates), and must even have this plan approved by Congress. Yet this pale, pathetic imitation of "change" is already being denounced by Republicans. The political atmosphere in Washington simply isn't in the FCC's favor right now.
Except that it costs $8/month for an ISP to actually provide broadband, and that $8 covers all their costs, not their costs of bandwidth, which is more like $1/month/customer. The issue is one of competition, which is impossible in an infrastructure heavy industry where duopolies rule the land. That's why regulation implementing a mechanism for competition, like line-sharing, is necessary, and anti-trust along with strong government action would do wonders for the industry.
I've been following news and speculation surrounding the plan for the better part of a year now. There were numerous tell-tale signs that this was going to be a flop, like Blair Levin, the head of the NBP team, discounting the importance of line-sharing, despite it being touted as the single-most effective means of promoting competition in the ISP industry by a Harvard-Berkman study commissioned by the FCC.
Also, Dave Burstein is amazing. The guy knows more about telecom than anyone else in Washington. I highly recommend you read his website at DSLPrime.com
Really? You think Republicans were simply mincing on words and in fact arguing that the "end effects" of the bill would result in death panels? Are you seriously that crazy? Where in god's name in the health bill does it say death panels will be set up, or Grandma is going to die at the hands of the government? It's up to the perpetrators of the claim to prove themselves.
Our greatest decade of economic growth in recent history was the 1960s under JFK, a Democrat. Corporate taxes were much higher at that time.
See, I understand certain aspects of progressivism, but I think in some cases it goes too far. While I'm economically progressive, I'm socially conservative. I look at women and see them working full-time, only stopping work to care for their children until they're 6 months or 1 year old, and I can't help but feel depressed at the state of "progressive" nations.
Equality is fine if two quantities are indeed equal, but humans are *not* all equal. We didn't evolve that way, and our psychologies do not fit into such rigid idealistic categorization. In fact it is quite effectively argued that modern law favors females over males, given the natural differences between the two that are not accounted for by law.
I didn't mean for this to descend into a male vs. female rant. What I'm trying to say is that "progressive" societies have become materialistic and ignored many of the spiritual and emotional benefits of traditional societies. Values preached in philosophies such as Buddhism or Confucianism are simply thrown to the wayside to focus on the material well-being of everyone.
This might seem good on the surface, but underneath I feel that things are lacking.
Except...he's let the banks and Wall Street get away with every crime they committed that resulted in our economy nearly falling off a precipice. His banking reforms are pathetic cop-outs to Wall Street, and nothing has changed in that sector. He reappointed Timothy Geithner as Treasury head and had him write the reforms, which is just insane as the guy is pure evil.
To quote/paraphrase Jon Stewart, I can't tell if Obama is Obiwan playing chess on a 3D board while everyone else is stuck in 2D, or if he's getting the snot beat out of him.