If the ISPs are forbidden (by government) to meter users per GB downloaded, or charge overage fees for the high-download users that pass a cap, then the ISPs will respond by throttling connections to achieve the same goal:
Say 250 GB / 30 days / 12 hours per day average usage / 3600 seconds == 1.5 Megabit/s throttle
>>>They requested the limit go up to screw with their competitors or to force them to bump up service for their customers
Who is "they"? The FCC? Obama? I think they requested the 256k definition of broadband be pushed-up, and yes I think it was for altruistic reasons. I'm not sure why you say it was not? Or why you think I'm a "fool that doesn't understand capitalism".
How can something be less than free? In my experience, even the free stuff isn't really free, since you have to invest time (like TV with the ~20 mins/hour of ads). The only truly free stuff is ad free as well (such as the various FM-HD2 stations)*
So less than free means what? *They* pay *me*? I remember the paid-to-surf companies, but I never got a dime out of them, since they went bankrupt.
>>>they've been petitioning the FCC to lower the definition of "broadband" in the U.S
False. Back in 2009 the FCC definition of broadband was the same as the OECD's definition - 256 kbit/s. They put out a public notice for comment, and Verizon said 768k while Comcast suggested tiers: 768k for "basic" broadband and 12,000k for "next gen" broadband.
In both cases, the corporations requested the definition be moved UPward not downward, so your statement is false...... This is now 2011, and nobody is petitioning for the definition to be lowered from the current 4000 kbit/s. Unless you can provide a citation that it's happening now, in the present?
I can see that this really promotes innovation. The third episode of Pioneer One is due any day now; I guess it's HDTV for the rest of the world and "VHS quality" for you 1980s types (thanks to your provider, of course). PS hang on to that Atari 2600 "heavy sixer" - it will be worth something some day.
If this post has a point, I am failing to find it. All I was saying is that I prefer smaller ~100 meg or ~200 meg downloads of my favorite episodes.
If they can't meter users that Excessively use the internet (i.e. downloading thousands of gigs), then the ISPs will respond by throttling connections to achieve the same goal:
Say 500 GB / 30 days / 12 hours per day average usage / 3600 seconds == 3 Megabit/s throttle
Really? Our meters were upgraded to eliminate human readers, by sending the data over the phone line (or possibly the electric line - not sure which).
>>>most people will just pay because they have no idea what a gigabyte is
I hope they're smarter than that. If I received a $200 bill from my ISP, even if I didn't know what a gigabyte was, I'd demand an explanation from their customer service associates.
>>>this semi-monopoly, is to get the feds involved.
Why the feds? Usually it's the Member State government that regulates natural monopolies aka utilities (like electricity, water, natural gas, sewer, etc).
P.S. In order to keep my GB usage down, and avoid the wrath of my provider, I look for the "napisyPL" or "ipod" or "videoseed" releases. They are nice-and-small but still VHS quality. And commercial free.
I can see a 50-state lawsuit coming out of this. Wonder how ATT feels about taking on 50 government all at the same time.
Bastards. - It reminds me how they tried to charge me extra for my 80s-era 1200 baud modem (i.e. ~1 kbit/s). I was paying for "unlimited phone calls" rather than per-call billing, but they said my 16-hour per day usage was excessive and tried to charge me an extra "data fee". I threw the letter in the trash.
Later-on we got phone company choice, and I switched away from ATT.
I can not lay my hand on any part of the Union Constitution which gives the Executive branch power to act like the Judicial branch. Perhaps I don't understand the "ITC"'s location within the government, but it appears to me to be an unconstitutional organization.
As for the patent: People at my Computer Users Group were taking digital photos with Commodore Amigas as early as 1985. I still have several of them stored away. That would be considered "prior art" right? So the patent should be invalidated.
So..... "It makes no logical sense to pick on petrol as "evil" while ignoring all the other dangerous pollutants/impacts caused by homo sapiens." Another reason I said this is because I don't consider petrol evil. A few years ago the US DOE performed a "GREET" study which found the most energy efficient, and carbon-neutral, vehicle was not an electric. It was a petrol-electric or diesel-electric hybrid.
Other studies have shown that coal-powered plants, with scrubbers and thorough burning, are actually cleaner than natural gas or nuclear plants.
We should be planning our future *wisely* and choosing whatever is the best for the environment, even if that turns-out to be a oil-or-coal-based society. We should not jump to rash conclusions like "petrol/coal is evil".
>>>This is supposedly exactly what many Slashdotters have been claiming they've wanted for years and years -- a la carte TV channels. However, I can assure you that when they come, everyone around here will start bitching about how they're getting ripped off, >>>
Flat wrong.
What we want is to be able to buy the current bundles (~70 channels for basic, ~300 channels extended), OR individual channels. We want the choice
BTW a la carte already exists for Satellite radio and it works great. ~$15 for the whole bundle of channels, or $6 for forty channels of your choice. I now subscribe to XM radio where it used to be too expensive, because now I get exactly what I want.
Same with CATV - I'd choose MSNBC, FOXnews, Syfy, and that's it. $5 hookup fee plus ~$2/channel. Much, much less than $60 currently charged.
>>>The channels want to bypass the middle man and sell streaming content over their (Time warner) internet connection to end users for retail price
Yeah you're probably right. Why sell Syfy channel just once, when you can sell it twice? First to the CATV provider, and second to the iPhone user. I apologize for my earlier post (which was modded -1).
>>>The use of petrol is a detriment to our society. Those who use less of it should be rewarded and those who use more of it punished.
Having been an environmentalist at one point, I can tell you that BEING ALIVE is a detriment to society. Humans produce tons and tons of pollution each year. Other forms of energy also causes damage, as does food production (especially meat), and human waste products (urine, feces,methane), and the draining of water supplies/lakes/rivers. It makes no logical sense to pick on petrol as "evil" while ignoring all the other dangerous pollutants/impacts caused by homo sapiens.
If you don't believe me, just consider how much pollution would be reduced if only 30 million humans were in the US. It would basically be a non-issue. (No I'm not some kind of nut advocating genocide. It's a thought experiment.)
Yes they like litigation, but what they're really doing is protecting their income. Each channel gets around 75 cents per home, per month. (Some get as little as 10 cents, others like ESPN get 300 cents.)
It is only natural for a business to want to protect itself from losing a valuable revenue stream.
>>>why bother living in a small apartment downtown when I can get a sprawling, waste of space out in the 'burbs
I object to this characterization of my house. Every area is full with personal items, and not "waste of space". And no way could I fit all my stuff in a small city apartment. Nor could I afford the rent (~$2000/month).
Looking at those photos makes me feel claustrophobic.
As for the Miles Tax, I think it's the only good solution as more-and-more cars gain the ability to drive without using (or barely-using) gasoline/diesel. These cars are not paying the Gas/Road Tax that keeps them maintained, so the Miles Tax is a good solution.
Of course I would phase-out the gas tax, rather than double tax drivers for road fees.
>>>He probably modded himself up with his 25 accts.
You can't do that. Slashdot tracks the *IP* not the account, so you can't post with one id, log in with another, and then boost your score.
Of course if you have more than one IP (like home and work), then you could get around that limitation but that's seems like too much effort for minimal return. No troll would bother.
>>>You know what happens if you tell your supplier they need to open up their stuff to you for scrutiny just in case they're doing something offensive to a 3rd party?
The government does this all the time with its suppliers. Whether or not GM should be able to do it with its suppliers? Not an easy answer. Personally I think the outcome could be positive, in order to prevent pirating Chinese companies from underbidding US companies that obey the law.
Of course I think it more important the US impose regulations regarding worker protection laws, then protecting Microsoft's copyright. For example if Foxconn is not giving workers a break every two hours (per chinese law), then Foxconn parts would be blocked from entering the US until they corrected the problem.
Underneath my name. Therefore MY opinion...... I just love when I say something like, "I think George Bush and Barak Obama sucked as presidents," and somebody else retorts, "That's just YOUR opinion."
Yeah. No shit sherlock. I never claimed otherwise.
Yes the old episodes are still copyrighted. Your point? (points to thousands of disks downloaded in the 80s from pirate BBSes). I'll buy a show/game/song if I like it, but most of the pre-75 Doctor Who doesn't qualify - I'd not want to watch them twice.
Anon. Coward: Sorry I can't access demonoid.com from work, so there's no way for me to provide "keywords". Maybe Doctor Who Complete or something similar. Google found this: www.demonoid.com/files/details/1190423
Slashdot Mirror
If the ISPs are forbidden (by government) to meter users per GB downloaded, or charge overage fees for the high-download users that pass a cap, then the ISPs will respond by throttling connections to achieve the same goal:
Say 250 GB / 30 days / 12 hours per day average usage / 3600 seconds == 1.5 Megabit/s throttle
>>>They requested the limit go up to screw with their competitors or to force them to bump up service for their customers
Who is "they"? The FCC? Obama? I think they requested the 256k definition of broadband be pushed-up, and yes I think it was for altruistic reasons. I'm not sure why you say it was not? Or why you think I'm a "fool that doesn't understand capitalism".
Gold cables made a difference in the world of analog.
Whether or not you could actually hear the difference, is a different matter. (Probably not.)
How can something be less than free? In my experience, even the free stuff isn't really free, since you have to invest time (like TV with the ~20 mins/hour of ads). The only truly free stuff is ad free as well (such as the various FM-HD2 stations)*
So less than free means what? *They* pay *me*? I remember the paid-to-surf companies, but I never got a dime out of them, since they went bankrupt.
*
* example: http://provisioning.streamtheworld.com/pls/WWMXHD2DIALUP.pls
http://1681.live.streamtheworld.com/WWMXHD2DIALUP_SC
>>>they've been petitioning the FCC to lower the definition of "broadband" in the U.S
False. Back in 2009 the FCC definition of broadband was the same as the OECD's definition - 256 kbit/s. They put out a public notice for comment, and Verizon said 768k while Comcast suggested tiers: 768k for "basic" broadband and 12,000k for "next gen" broadband.
In both cases, the corporations requested the definition be moved UPward not downward, so your statement is false...... This is now 2011, and nobody is petitioning for the definition to be lowered from the current 4000 kbit/s. Unless you can provide a citation that it's happening now, in the present?
Anon Coward writes:
I can see that this really promotes innovation. The third episode of Pioneer One is due any day now; I guess it's HDTV for the rest of the world and "VHS quality" for you 1980s types (thanks to your provider, of course). PS hang on to that Atari 2600 "heavy sixer" - it will be worth something some day.
If this post has a point, I am failing to find it. All I was saying is that I prefer smaller ~100 meg or ~200 meg downloads of my favorite episodes.
If they can't meter users that Excessively use the internet (i.e. downloading thousands of gigs), then the ISPs will respond by throttling connections to achieve the same goal:
Say 500 GB / 30 days / 12 hours per day average usage / 3600 seconds == 3 Megabit/s throttle
>>>meter reader mistyped
Really? Our meters were upgraded to eliminate human readers, by sending the data over the phone line (or possibly the electric line - not sure which).
>>>most people will just pay because they have no idea what a gigabyte is
I hope they're smarter than that. If I received a $200 bill from my ISP, even if I didn't know what a gigabyte was, I'd demand an explanation from their customer service associates.
>>>this semi-monopoly, is to get the feds involved.
Why the feds? Usually it's the Member State government that regulates natural monopolies aka utilities (like electricity, water, natural gas, sewer, etc).
P.S. In order to keep my GB usage down, and avoid the wrath of my provider, I look for the "napisyPL" or "ipod" or "videoseed" releases. They are nice-and-small but still VHS quality. And commercial free.
I can see a 50-state lawsuit coming out of this. Wonder how ATT feels about taking on 50 government all at the same time.
Bastards.
- It reminds me how they tried to charge me extra for my 80s-era 1200 baud modem (i.e. ~1 kbit/s). I was paying for "unlimited phone calls" rather than per-call billing, but they said my 16-hour per day usage was excessive and tried to charge me an extra "data fee". I threw the letter in the trash.
Later-on we got phone company choice, and I switched away from ATT.
"Electronic camera for initiating capture of still images while previewing motion images.'"
Sounds exactly the same as what my Amiga-owning colleagues were doing in 1985, 86, 87, et cetera.
I can not lay my hand on any part of the Union Constitution which gives the Executive branch power to act like the Judicial branch. Perhaps I don't understand the "ITC"'s location within the government, but it appears to me to be an unconstitutional organization.
As for the patent:
People at my Computer Users Group were taking digital photos with Commodore Amigas as early as 1985. I still have several of them stored away. That would be considered "prior art" right? So the patent should be invalidated.
>>>I'm sorry, but so what?
So..... "It makes no logical sense to pick on petrol as "evil" while ignoring all the other dangerous pollutants/impacts caused by homo sapiens." Another reason I said this is because I don't consider petrol evil. A few years ago the US DOE performed a "GREET" study which found the most energy efficient, and carbon-neutral, vehicle was not an electric. It was a petrol-electric or diesel-electric hybrid.
Other studies have shown that coal-powered plants, with scrubbers and thorough burning, are actually cleaner than natural gas or nuclear plants.
We should be planning our future *wisely* and choosing whatever is the best for the environment, even if that turns-out to be a oil-or-coal-based society. We should not jump to rash conclusions like "petrol/coal is evil".
>>>This is supposedly exactly what many Slashdotters have been claiming they've wanted for years and years -- a la carte TV channels. However, I can assure you that when they come, everyone around here will start bitching about how they're getting ripped off,
>>>
Flat wrong.
What we want is to be able to buy the current bundles (~70 channels for basic, ~300 channels extended), OR individual channels. We want the choice
BTW a la carte already exists for Satellite radio and it works great. ~$15 for the whole bundle of channels, or $6 for forty channels of your choice. I now subscribe to XM radio where it used to be too expensive, because now I get exactly what I want.
Same with CATV - I'd choose MSNBC, FOXnews, Syfy, and that's it. $5 hookup fee plus ~$2/channel. Much, much less than $60 currently charged.
>>>The channels want to bypass the middle man and sell streaming content over their (Time warner) internet connection to end users for retail price
Yeah you're probably right.
Why sell Syfy channel just once, when you can sell it twice? First to the CATV provider, and second to the iPhone user.
I apologize for my earlier post (which was modded -1).
>>>The use of petrol is a detriment to our society. Those who use less of it should be rewarded and those who use more of it punished.
Having been an environmentalist at one point, I can tell you that BEING ALIVE is a detriment to society. Humans produce tons and tons of pollution each year. Other forms of energy also causes damage, as does food production (especially meat), and human waste products (urine, feces,methane), and the draining of water supplies/lakes/rivers. It makes no logical sense to pick on petrol as "evil" while ignoring all the other dangerous pollutants/impacts caused by homo sapiens.
If you don't believe me, just consider how much pollution would be reduced if only 30 million humans were in the US. It would basically be a non-issue. (No I'm not some kind of nut advocating genocide. It's a thought experiment.)
Yes they like litigation, but what they're really doing is protecting their income. Each channel gets around 75 cents per home, per month. (Some get as little as 10 cents, others like ESPN get 300 cents.)
It is only natural for a business to want to protect itself from losing a valuable revenue stream.
>>>why bother living in a small apartment downtown when I can get a sprawling, waste of space out in the 'burbs
I object to this characterization of my house.
Every area is full with personal items, and not "waste of space".
And no way could I fit all my stuff in a small city apartment.
Nor could I afford the rent (~$2000/month).
Looking at those photos makes me feel claustrophobic.
As for the Miles Tax, I think it's the only good solution as more-and-more cars gain the ability to drive without using (or barely-using) gasoline/diesel. These cars are not paying the Gas/Road Tax that keeps them maintained, so the Miles Tax is a good solution.
Of course I would phase-out the gas tax, rather than double tax drivers for road fees.
>>>He probably modded himself up with his 25 accts.
You can't do that. Slashdot tracks the *IP* not the account, so you can't post with one id, log in with another, and then boost your score.
Of course if you have more than one IP (like home and work), then you could get around that limitation but that's seems like too much effort for minimal return. No troll would bother.
>>>You know what happens if you tell your supplier they need to open up their stuff to you for scrutiny just in case they're doing something offensive to a 3rd party?
The government does this all the time with its suppliers.
Whether or not GM should be able to do it with its suppliers? Not an easy answer. Personally I think the outcome could be positive, in order to prevent pirating Chinese companies from underbidding US companies that obey the law.
Of course I think it more important the US impose regulations regarding worker protection laws, then protecting Microsoft's copyright. For example if Foxconn is not giving workers a break every two hours (per chinese law), then Foxconn parts would be blocked from entering the US until they corrected the problem.
Your comment was Any businessman who profits from charity is dishonest/immoral. That's akin to saying: Any Christian you meet hates gays.
Neither statement is true.
>>>It's not an opinion. It's a statement of fact.
Underneath my name. Therefore MY opinion...... I just love when I say something like, "I think George Bush and Barak Obama sucked as presidents," and somebody else retorts, "That's just YOUR opinion."
Yeah. No shit sherlock. I never claimed otherwise.
Yes the old episodes are still copyrighted. Your point? (points to thousands of disks downloaded in the 80s from pirate BBSes). I'll buy a show/game/song if I like it, but most of the pre-75 Doctor Who doesn't qualify - I'd not want to watch them twice.
Anon. Coward: Sorry I can't access demonoid.com from work, so there's no way for me to provide "keywords". Maybe Doctor Who Complete or something similar. Google found this: www.demonoid.com/files/details/1190423