Don't forget that any time someone claims data collected is "anonymized" they are implying something that is not true: that the data collected can't be tied to you.
Just about the entire psychiatric community has already stated that he is a sociopath.
I think Trump is perhaps the worst thing to happen to the US in my lifetime, but this statement is not just wrong, it's ridiculous.
Some psychiatrists have made such statements (usually in conjunction with a book they're selling), but no reputable psychiatrist would ever say it, for one simple reason: It's impossible to accurately diagnose someone without actually examining them personally, and doing so is a kind of malpractice.
Do they stick a gun to your head to join and become a FB drone...? I don't think so.
Well, they sorta do. If anybody you know mentions you, Facebook is keeping a file on you whether you joined them or not. Even if you never explicitly signed up, the odds are overwhelming that you have a "shadow account" on Facebook.
They're instantly liable for fraud and/or false advertising the moment they try to block anything on their "internet" service.
Yeah, right. Just like they're liable for the fraud and false advertising that they've been engaging in up to now? Yes, technically liable, but in reality, nothing is done.
With the FTC involved, anti-NN becomes an untenable business risk.
Also not true. The FTC has been underfunded and overworked for decades. They can't even keep up with chasing down and prosecuting non-internet-related scams that actually hurt people. Expect approximately zero help from the FTC.
That's why Pai is so keen on kicking the can to them -- he knows that it is giving his paymasters free reign to do anything they want.
Instead of killing it you as well could have tried to improve it.
That was politically impossible. The shuttle as originally envisioned by NASA wouldn't have had these problems at all. It could have been improved by reverting to the original plan. But Congress didn't want that.
The shuttle was not expensive because it was expensive.
When I say "expensive", I mean the cost per pound of payload. That expense was mostly due to the insane level of complexity of the shuttle's engines, which wasn't as reusable as the PR flaks liked to say. They had to be completely rebuilt after every flight.
the idea that a few companies get rich on it was expensive. Your stupid idea how capitalizem works in government versus company interaction was expensive.
That was certainly a large factor, but not the most important one. By the way, you don't know what ideas I have about how capitalism works or doesn't work, so you have no basis on which to call them "stupid".
So, Idgit Poophead is gonna watch out for companies doing something they shouldn't and tell them they're bad
No, it's not even that good. He's going to look out for companies doing evil things to see if they told you they're doing evil things. If they did, then all is well.
This is what they've been saying from the beginning. The correct summary is "you have no protection."
All they're saying is that when your ISP decides to screw you, all they have to do is tell you they're doing it and they're home free.
That solves nothing at all. It might be useful if you had the ability to use a different ISP with better policies -- but the odds are overwhelming that you don't.
What is the problem they are trying to fix by repealing Net Neutrality?
The problem they are trying to fix is that the major telecoms are slightly limited in how much they can rip off the public. They want to remove those limits.
People complain if you use plain text because the font hurts their eyes. They complain if you don't send them a screen shot or highlight/underline/bold what's important.
You need a better set of coworkers. I never send HTML email in business settings, and I've never once had anyone complain about it. BTW, you can still send screenshots (as well as any other attachments) with plain text email.
Listen, if you send HTML email, you are doing the equivalent of sneezing in your friends face.
This is exactly right. Unfortunately, people don't seem to care about the well-being of their friends and neighbors anymore. Look how many are willing to sell them out by mentioning them to and in Facebook.
Plus, killing the shuttle program was the right thing to do and long overdue. With all of the money we blew on it (producing easily the most expensive, least reliable, and deadliest spacecraft in the history of the US space program), many experts think we could have gotten our asses to Mars by now.
I disagree. The right thing legally is to recognize the actual fact of the matter: an ISP is communications carrier, not a content creator.
The FCC is doing everything it can to distract from this simple fact. It's a gigantic lie, intended to benefit major corporations at the expense of us all.
"Light touch" regulation failed. ISPs began to abuse their positions, and that's why NN became a thing.
It's true that if we could somehow get a real competitive market in place where people had real options for where people get their internet service from, we wouldn't need anything like NN. I suspect that everyone (except the ISPs) would prefer that solution.
However, that appears to be an impossible goal. So, the next best thing is something like NN regulations.
The worst possible thing is the FCC's position of just letting the ISPs do as they please. The FCC is saying "fuck you" to us all -- either we have to be OK with bending over for the ISPs or we get to do without the internet.
This is precisely why I don't allow my email reader to load any external resources (like images), and half of the reason why I don't allow my email to be interpreted through an HTML parser.
Slashdot Mirror
It's anonymized they claim
Don't forget that any time someone claims data collected is "anonymized" they are implying something that is not true: that the data collected can't be tied to you.
Seems like it would be a lot easier to use a more reasonable browser instead.
I'll add this to my list of reasons why I'll never use the new versions of Firefox.
iOS is hugely popular in the USA and a few other countries
And even within the US, there are huge geographical differences.
That is why nearly everyone you know carries a iPhone
Actually, nearly everyone I know uses an Android phone. I can count the total number of iPhones I see regularly on one hand.
At the initial price point, it wasn't exactly a stellar deal for anybody.
Personally, I still consider it seriously overpriced as it lacks essentials such as headphone jack, SD card slot and removable battery.
True, but the Constitution doesn't require us to seriously overspend on it.
"129 million" is a pretty huge market just waiting to be taken over by a pro-neutrality company
If only that outcome was in the realm of the possible.
Just about the entire psychiatric community has already stated that he is a sociopath.
I think Trump is perhaps the worst thing to happen to the US in my lifetime, but this statement is not just wrong, it's ridiculous.
Some psychiatrists have made such statements (usually in conjunction with a book they're selling), but no reputable psychiatrist would ever say it, for one simple reason: It's impossible to accurately diagnose someone without actually examining them personally, and doing so is a kind of malpractice.
Do they stick a gun to your head to join and become a FB drone...? I don't think so.
Well, they sorta do. If anybody you know mentions you, Facebook is keeping a file on you whether you joined them or not. Even if you never explicitly signed up, the odds are overwhelming that you have a "shadow account" on Facebook.
Who scares you actually more . . . Donald Trump or Mark Zuckerberg?
It's six of one, half-dozen of the other. Although I think that Zuckerberg is more competent than Trump, so I guess I fear him a touch more.
They're instantly liable for fraud and/or false advertising the moment they try to block anything on their "internet" service.
Yeah, right. Just like they're liable for the fraud and false advertising that they've been engaging in up to now? Yes, technically liable, but in reality, nothing is done.
With the FTC involved, anti-NN becomes an untenable business risk.
Also not true. The FTC has been underfunded and overworked for decades. They can't even keep up with chasing down and prosecuting non-internet-related scams that actually hurt people. Expect approximately zero help from the FTC.
That's why Pai is so keen on kicking the can to them -- he knows that it is giving his paymasters free reign to do anything they want.
Instead of killing it you as well could have tried to improve it.
That was politically impossible. The shuttle as originally envisioned by NASA wouldn't have had these problems at all. It could have been improved by reverting to the original plan. But Congress didn't want that.
The shuttle was not expensive because it was expensive.
When I say "expensive", I mean the cost per pound of payload. That expense was mostly due to the insane level of complexity of the shuttle's engines, which wasn't as reusable as the PR flaks liked to say. They had to be completely rebuilt after every flight.
the idea that a few companies get rich on it was expensive. Your stupid idea how capitalizem works in government versus company interaction was expensive.
That was certainly a large factor, but not the most important one. By the way, you don't know what ideas I have about how capitalism works or doesn't work, so you have no basis on which to call them "stupid".
For example when Comcast charges $5/mo for access to facebook, a competitor can give that access free
What competitor? This is the US. There is no effective competition.
So, Idgit Poophead is gonna watch out for companies doing something they shouldn't and tell them they're bad
No, it's not even that good. He's going to look out for companies doing evil things to see if they told you they're doing evil things. If they did, then all is well.
Who knows how evil they'd get though.
Considering that they rank fairly high on the evil scale right now, my prediction is "extremely".
This is what they've been saying from the beginning. The correct summary is "you have no protection."
All they're saying is that when your ISP decides to screw you, all they have to do is tell you they're doing it and they're home free.
That solves nothing at all. It might be useful if you had the ability to use a different ISP with better policies -- but the odds are overwhelming that you don't.
What is the problem they are trying to fix by repealing Net Neutrality?
The problem they are trying to fix is that the major telecoms are slightly limited in how much they can rip off the public. They want to remove those limits.
People complain if you use plain text because the font hurts their eyes. They complain if you don't send them a screen shot or highlight/underline/bold what's important.
You need a better set of coworkers. I never send HTML email in business settings, and I've never once had anyone complain about it. BTW, you can still send screenshots (as well as any other attachments) with plain text email.
Listen, if you send HTML email, you are doing the equivalent of sneezing in your friends face.
This is exactly right. Unfortunately, people don't seem to care about the well-being of their friends and neighbors anymore. Look how many are willing to sell them out by mentioning them to and in Facebook.
Or even better, cut military spending to something slightly less insane.
Plus, killing the shuttle program was the right thing to do and long overdue. With all of the money we blew on it (producing easily the most expensive, least reliable, and deadliest spacecraft in the history of the US space program), many experts think we could have gotten our asses to Mars by now.
The administration is doing what's right legally
I disagree. The right thing legally is to recognize the actual fact of the matter: an ISP is communications carrier, not a content creator.
The FCC is doing everything it can to distract from this simple fact. It's a gigantic lie, intended to benefit major corporations at the expense of us all.
"Light touch" regulation failed. ISPs began to abuse their positions, and that's why NN became a thing.
It's true that if we could somehow get a real competitive market in place where people had real options for where people get their internet service from, we wouldn't need anything like NN. I suspect that everyone (except the ISPs) would prefer that solution.
However, that appears to be an impossible goal. So, the next best thing is something like NN regulations.
The worst possible thing is the FCC's position of just letting the ISPs do as they please. The FCC is saying "fuck you" to us all -- either we have to be OK with bending over for the ISPs or we get to do without the internet.
This is precisely why I don't allow my email reader to load any external resources (like images), and half of the reason why I don't allow my email to be interpreted through an HTML parser.