Net Neutrality is essential to prevent Internet Service Providers from choking off Content Providers who do not, or cannot, pay for enhanced bandwidth.
Imagine you have AT&T DSL service. You pay for Time Warner IPTV service. Under Net Neutrality, there is no problem with this arrangement. Without Net Neutrality, AT&T can and will keep its competitor Time Warner's IPTV off its high speed network. This effectively restricts you from accessing Time Warner IPTV since decent TV over the Internet will obviously require a LOT of bandwidth.
This scenario is exactly the same for VOIP, movies on demand, and every other high bandwidth service. For every high bandwidth service an ISP provides, there will be an incredibly expensive barrier for its competitors to overcome.
The end of Net Neutrality will be an exact repeat of the ILEC/CLEC disaster. We will end up with a duopoly of Cable and DSL who each provide a stack of high bandwidth services with effectively no competitors on the high bandwidth networks.
For this reason, I urge you to enforce the principle of Net Neutrality.
--
I know it's not perfect, but I think it's a reasonable comment. -l
Huh, what? That's a flawed analogy. Keeping them in prison keeps them from committing crimes.
No it doesn't. They commit crimes aplenty against other inmates, guards, etc. Worse, their hopeless, amoral mentality in a permanent captive environment creates a demand for protection rackets such as prison gangs and fosters sex slavery and rape. These things do not stay isolated among prisoners. When subordinates get out of prison, they often carry on these behaviors at large. Remember the black guy that was dragged to death behind a truck in Jasper, Texas? The perpetrators were members of a racist prison gang that came about to create protection for fellow whites.
It doesn't end. These people are violent in or out of prison and turn otherwise normal prisoners into violent offenders.
Sometimes I think the Japanese, Greeks, etc. had it right with forced suicides.
-l
The death penalty is just state sanctioned revenge killing, which is both morally unjustifiable and ineffective from a pragmatic standpoint.
Most parolees of violent offenses end up back in prison. By your argument, we should just set them free because prison is ineffective from a pragmatic standpoint. The point of prison is to keep the bad guys off the streets, give them a chance to reform, and to mete out justice (a high-falutin' term for "revenge", "what goes around comes around", "you get what you deserve", etc.).
Prisoners with no chance of parole are consistently shown to cause the most trouble (prison gangs, killings, etc.). Many, if not most, are beyond reform so allowing parole is entirely out of the question. So, it is impossible to prevent them from causing societal ill, even in prison, and reform is impossible. All you are left with is justice, and allowing them to cause communal harm in prison amounts to injustice for others. The only remaining option is death, which is entirely moral in this case.
Having said that, as governor of Texas, I would suspend all death sentences until DNA review of every case had been done. Furthermore, I would expand it to all life-without-possibility-of-parole cases for the above-mentioned reasons, at least for folks without post-incarceration offenses. If it ain't the right guy, what the hell is the point?
I made drip coffee through a plastic filter for the better part of 5 years. Due to cafestol, I recently switched back to paper filters. It definitely affects the flavor.
Aha! You speak of cafestol, the primary reason I switched back to paper filters from an old plastic one I'd been using for 5+ years. I do admit that I prefer the flavor of unfiltered coffee. However, with my genetic cholesterol profile, the risks outweigh the benefits, at least as far as regular consumption is concerned. I'm not concerned about the occasional espresso. But as a pot-a-day kinda guy (I drink swiss-process decaf), that was a *LOT* of cholesterol being dumped in my bloodstream.
You are correct, however, one man's "random" is another man's one time pad.:) (of course the OTP would only be useful over a classical link. Point about randomness still being useful holds).
I've seen a number of laptop-only acts and let me tell you, they are BORING AS HELL. I'd rather be tied to a chair watching fifth grade Green Day cover bands than go to another boring laptop gig. At least the fifth graders jump around and try to rock out. Your typical laptop DJ stares at the screen, brow furrowed, attempting to divine the next loop to mix in. His idea of rocking out is leaning back in his chair and smiling. You know, that's great and all, but when you pay $10, $20, even $30 to go to the rock show, you want to be entertained by an artist thoroughly enjoying himself, not bored to tears. (BTW, I'm intentionally using "him" because I've never seen a woman equate moving a mouse with a live act.)
A real DJ, laptop or not, rocks out, dances, enjoys the beats, rocks the crowd. My advice to budding artists: keep the laptop, but if you're going to do a live show, be prepared to use your whole body to entertain. Otherwise, your show is no better than a Muzak CD rocking the elevator at work.
It's a sure bet the vast majority will end up in landfills without a reasonable recycling campaign. I'd much rather pay taxes to get a gray Iron Mountain style box with good padding in it to put these things in with the weekly recycling than pay to clean up all the landfills in the area. I contacted my city officials about it, but they're concerned about OSHA requirements and worker safety. I suggested that maybe they should do like Goodwill and park an 18 wheeler in various quadrants of the city at various times with one or two guys to sort/pack the waste for travel to the central facility. It would still be a far sight cheaper than paying for mercury remediation in 5 years worth of garbage at the landfill.
There was definitely some 3D pandering-to-the-audience early on in the film (couple of things going over the audience or whatever), but once the film gets its footing, they use it to add perspective, not as a cheap trick. It's not like the old 3D Friday the 13th or Honey I Shrunk the Audience. My biggest issues with the film are that it starts off so boring, costs $10/person, and they didn't even recycle the glasses.
I thought the secret to water conservation was "if it's yellow leave it mellow; if it's brown flush it down". Are you telling me there's a "hold it" corollary?
Slashdot Mirror
Can you post a link to the "master-slave power block" thing?
Thanks,
-l
Wasn't Austin. We're still beta-testing red light cameras.
-l
According to Wikipedia, 24 mph.
-l
Agreed. And I cannot STAND Dead Man's Party. That song sucks and it's like 20 minutes long. Or at least it seems like it.
$0.02USD,
-l
Net Neutrality is essential to prevent Internet Service Providers
from choking off Content Providers who do not, or cannot, pay for
enhanced bandwidth.
Imagine you have AT&T DSL service. You pay for Time Warner IPTV
service. Under Net Neutrality, there is no problem with this
arrangement. Without Net Neutrality, AT&T can and will keep its
competitor Time Warner's IPTV off its high speed network. This
effectively restricts you from accessing Time Warner IPTV since
decent TV over the Internet will obviously require a LOT of
bandwidth.
This scenario is exactly the same for VOIP, movies on demand,
and every other high bandwidth service. For every high bandwidth
service an ISP provides, there will be an incredibly expensive
barrier for its competitors to overcome.
The end of Net Neutrality will be an exact repeat of the ILEC/CLEC
disaster. We will end up with a duopoly of Cable and DSL who each
provide a stack of high bandwidth services with effectively no
competitors on the high bandwidth networks.
For this reason, I urge you to enforce the principle of Net
Neutrality.
--
I know it's not perfect, but I think it's a reasonable comment.
-l
According to Wikipedia, burning coal will yield around 1.5% of its mass in gallium. How's that for comedy?
"Want more solar? Burn more coal!"
-l
Copyright is the opposite of the free market.
-l
Maybe this version of Lego Star Wars won't crash on Wii. <eyes rolling>
-l
No it doesn't. They commit crimes aplenty against other inmates, guards, etc. Worse, their hopeless, amoral mentality in a permanent captive environment creates a demand for protection rackets such as prison gangs and fosters sex slavery and rape. These things do not stay isolated among prisoners. When subordinates get out of prison, they often carry on these behaviors at large. Remember the black guy that was dragged to death behind a truck in Jasper, Texas? The perpetrators were members of a racist prison gang that came about to create protection for fellow whites.
It doesn't end. These people are violent in or out of prison and turn otherwise normal prisoners into violent offenders.
Sometimes I think the Japanese, Greeks, etc. had it right with forced suicides.
-l
Most parolees of violent offenses end up back in prison. By your argument, we should just set them free because prison is ineffective from a pragmatic standpoint. The point of prison is to keep the bad guys off the streets, give them a chance to reform, and to mete out justice (a high-falutin' term for "revenge", "what goes around comes around", "you get what you deserve", etc.).
Prisoners with no chance of parole are consistently shown to cause the most trouble (prison gangs, killings, etc.). Many, if not most, are beyond reform so allowing parole is entirely out of the question. So, it is impossible to prevent them from causing societal ill, even in prison, and reform is impossible. All you are left with is justice, and allowing them to cause communal harm in prison amounts to injustice for others. The only remaining option is death, which is entirely moral in this case.
Having said that, as governor of Texas, I would suspend all death sentences until DNA review of every case had been done. Furthermore, I would expand it to all life-without-possibility-of-parole cases for the above-mentioned reasons, at least for folks without post-incarceration offenses. If it ain't the right guy, what the hell is the point?
My humble $0.02USD,
-l
Aha! A Heisenberg corollary.
-l
I made drip coffee through a plastic filter for the better part of 5 years. Due to cafestol, I recently switched back to paper filters. It definitely affects the flavor.
-l
Aha! You speak of cafestol, the primary reason I switched back to paper filters from an old plastic one I'd been using for 5+ years. I do admit that I prefer the flavor of unfiltered coffee. However, with my genetic cholesterol profile, the risks outweigh the benefits, at least as far as regular consumption is concerned. I'm not concerned about the occasional espresso. But as a pot-a-day kinda guy (I drink swiss-process decaf), that was a *LOT* of cholesterol being dumped in my bloodstream.
Cheers,
-l
Yeeeeaaahh I'll run my wife-interfacing mechanism through another VM. Brilliant!
-l
P.s., I actually enjoy interfacing with my wife and we do it on a regular basis. Har-dee-har-har.
Hey this isn't ITER! :)
-l
You are correct, however, one man's "random" is another man's one time pad. :) (of course the OTP would only be useful over a classical link. Point about randomness still being useful holds).
Cheers!
-l
-l
I've seen a number of laptop-only acts and let me tell you, they are BORING AS HELL. I'd rather be tied to a chair watching fifth grade Green Day cover bands than go to another boring laptop gig. At least the fifth graders jump around and try to rock out. Your typical laptop DJ stares at the screen, brow furrowed, attempting to divine the next loop to mix in. His idea of rocking out is leaning back in his chair and smiling. You know, that's great and all, but when you pay $10, $20, even $30 to go to the rock show, you want to be entertained by an artist thoroughly enjoying himself, not bored to tears. (BTW, I'm intentionally using "him" because I've never seen a woman equate moving a mouse with a live act.)
A real DJ, laptop or not, rocks out, dances, enjoys the beats, rocks the crowd. My advice to budding artists: keep the laptop, but if you're going to do a live show, be prepared to use your whole body to entertain. Otherwise, your show is no better than a Muzak CD rocking the elevator at work.
IMNSHO,
-l
Ouch! Humor!
-l
It's a sure bet the vast majority will end up in landfills without a reasonable recycling campaign. I'd much rather pay taxes to get a gray Iron Mountain style box with good padding in it to put these things in with the weekly recycling than pay to clean up all the landfills in the area. I contacted my city officials about it, but they're concerned about OSHA requirements and worker safety. I suggested that maybe they should do like Goodwill and park an 18 wheeler in various quadrants of the city at various times with one or two guys to sort/pack the waste for travel to the central facility. It would still be a far sight cheaper than paying for mercury remediation in 5 years worth of garbage at the landfill.
-l
There was definitely some 3D pandering-to-the-audience early on in the film (couple of things going over the audience or whatever), but once the film gets its footing, they use it to add perspective, not as a cheap trick. It's not like the old 3D Friday the 13th or Honey I Shrunk the Audience. My biggest issues with the film are that it starts off so boring, costs $10/person, and they didn't even recycle the glasses.
I still like Captain EO.
-l
In other news, Bjorn Stevens, world's tallest midget, and jumbo shrimp decry military intelligence in Iraq peace action.
-l
FINALLY! A real reason to upgrade to a T1: Piss off the neighbors.
-l
Right... so the top 1% should be paying 95% of the taxes. :p
Back in the real world, we nearly have a flat tax already.
-l
I thought the secret to water conservation was "if it's yellow leave it mellow; if it's brown flush it down". Are you telling me there's a "hold it" corollary?
-l