Forced licensing is and always has been a tool for limiting competition, under the guise of protecting the consumer. And here we see, yet again, the consumer is actually hurt, not helped.
Most 4-year degrees are not worth the price of admission. In our necessarily employment-focused world, most liberal arts degrees are totally worthless. Instead, completing a certain college with a certain GPA acts as an indicator of your potential worth to an employer. It's a $100,000 standardized test. The stuff you learned may help you on Jeopardy, but not in your job.
Even with focused disciplines like Computer Science, about half of the courses are useless for employment sake. Learning programming, design, teamwork, project planning, management, etc. are useful. Chemistry and calculus are not.
At some point people will realize this and stop paying $100k for college.
The submitter, 0ryan0, states that the change was made because "Democracy" contains the word "Democrat". This reason is not mentioned at all in the article.
MTV - Originally showed music videos, now Real World type shows VH1 - Originally music vids, now "I Love the..." and "The 100 Greatest..." A & E - Originally showed British shows (Masterpiece Theatre, etc.), now reality and edgy syndicated series. History - Originally documentary, now reality mixed with edgy docu-drama. Discovery - similar to History Bravo - Originally arts/drama, now reality HBO - Originally movies, now split between movies and series AMC - same as HBO...probably some more.
I would argue that tax evasion is a good thing, since taxes pay for invasions, wars, spying on citizens, corporate welfare, and ironically on attacking courageous leakers and whistleblowers. So instead of paying taxes, which can end up killing people, the mega-rich are building yachts, buying private jets, gold-plating things, etc., all of which creates jobs. Or they invest which creates/improves businesses and --yep, you guessed it-- creates jobs.
The telcom owns the fiber. You own your house. Net neutrality forces the telcom to open their fiber to all content. That would be like saying your house must be open to all of your neighbors.
If roads were private, different roads would have different texting policies and people would have the choice of whatever they wanted. Which ever road had the the safest policy would get more business and then other roads would follow suit in order to stay competitive.
My first card was the Sound Blaster 16 (non-ASP). Bought over the Pro Audio Spectrum 16. Later I got the Roland Sound Canvass Daughterboard, an obscure card that plugged right into the SB16 and greatly improved the MIDI quality. Creative offered the WaveBlaster which was similar.
The telcos own the fiber, just like you own your house or iPod. So the government forcing a telco to manage the fiber data in a certain way is no different than the gov't forcing you to use certain colors of paint in your house or certain songs on your iPod.
If you're for gov't regulating something belonging to some one else, then you've got to be OK with them regulating something belonging to YOU.
If telcos start restricting content, and lots of people absolutely hate it, then there will be a lot of money to be made in building an open network, and business people will flock to create such open networks. Even before restrictions started, sentiment of the idea alone would create profit opportunities.
"Amazon has enjoyed an unfair 5%-10% price advantage over local retailers, while also depriving states and localities of hundreds of millions of dollars of legally due revenue each year."
Awwww, poor little politicians getting less money to spread to favored parties.
States should lower/eliminate sales taxes, so people keep more of their own money instead of it disappearing into a bureaucratic black hole.
99.9% of people are against taxation. I know this because if you made taxes optional, no one would pay them.
Of course the immoral among us are in favor of property confiscation from others by force, that is to say, taxes.
Also, the plan may create jobs, but only those taken from the air travel industry and the auto travel industry. And they aren't doing too well, I believe.
My point was that it is sad that the federal government is so large that they need yet another bureaucrat to support all the other bureaucrats.
If you are in favor of this, you can pay the CTO's salary, and pay for all of the IT infrastructure supporting the hundreds of bloated bureaucracies in the federal government. But don't make me pay.
Since the government has no money except tax collections, they are simply taking money from one taxpayer to give to another. So unless you are going to take advantage of this program, you will be paying for it.
The fact that people are debating who should be the Technology Central Planner, instead of realizing that the very idea of one is silly and dangerous, shows that liberty is dead.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, we need the FCC, they're great.
Forced licensing is and always has been a tool for limiting competition, under the guise of protecting the consumer. And here we see, yet again, the consumer is actually hurt, not helped.
I hope all of you Obama supporters are happy now.
Next time you look in the mirror you'll realize you are nothing but a sucker who got duped by slogans and promises.
Most 4-year degrees are not worth the price of admission. In our necessarily employment-focused world, most liberal arts degrees are totally worthless. Instead, completing a certain college with a certain GPA acts as an indicator of your potential worth to an employer. It's a $100,000 standardized test. The stuff you learned may help you on Jeopardy, but not in your job.
Even with focused disciplines like Computer Science, about half of the courses are useless for employment sake. Learning programming, design, teamwork, project planning, management, etc. are useful. Chemistry and calculus are not.
At some point people will realize this and stop paying $100k for college.
Every day some new boondoggle is revealed from Washington DC. Let's just cancel the federal government.
"The Obama administration has provided a loan guarantee..." So if it fails, is Obama going to personally take the financial hit?
The submitter, 0ryan0, states that the change was made because "Democracy" contains the word "Democrat". This reason is not mentioned at all in the article.
MTV - Originally showed music videos, now Real World type shows ..." and "The 100 Greatest..." ...probably some more.
VH1 - Originally music vids, now "I Love the
A & E - Originally showed British shows (Masterpiece Theatre, etc.), now reality and edgy syndicated series.
History - Originally documentary, now reality mixed with edgy docu-drama.
Discovery - similar to History
Bravo - Originally arts/drama, now reality
HBO - Originally movies, now split between movies and series
AMC - same as HBO
Why would I donate $$$ to some guy who wasn't smart enough to work anonymously?
I would argue that tax evasion is a good thing, since taxes pay for invasions, wars, spying on citizens, corporate welfare, and ironically on attacking courageous leakers and whistleblowers. So instead of paying taxes, which can end up killing people, the mega-rich are building yachts, buying private jets, gold-plating things, etc., all of which creates jobs. Or they invest which creates/improves businesses and --yep, you guessed it-- creates jobs.
iChromeOS
The telcom owns the fiber. You own your house. Net neutrality forces the telcom to open their fiber to all content. That would be like saying your house must be open to all of your neighbors.
If roads were private, different roads would have different texting policies and people would have the choice of whatever they wanted. Which ever road had the the safest policy would get more business and then other roads would follow suit in order to stay competitive.
Who'd have thunk it -- more war, more spending, more spying on citizens.
Thanks, feds, for spending the money of folks living in the 42 states not affected by hurricanes.
My first card was the Sound Blaster 16 (non-ASP). Bought over the Pro Audio Spectrum 16. Later I got the Roland Sound Canvass Daughterboard, an obscure card that plugged right into the SB16 and greatly improved the MIDI quality. Creative offered the WaveBlaster which was similar.
Came with a ton of software including:
DR. SBAITSO!
The telcos own the fiber, just like you own your house or iPod. So the government forcing a telco to manage the fiber data in a certain way is no different than the gov't forcing you to use certain colors of paint in your house or certain songs on your iPod.
If you're for gov't regulating something belonging to some one else, then you've got to be OK with them regulating something belonging to YOU.
If telcos start restricting content, and lots of people absolutely hate it, then there will be a lot of money to be made in building an open network, and business people will flock to create such open networks. Even before restrictions started, sentiment of the idea alone would create profit opportunities.
"Amazon has enjoyed an unfair 5%-10% price advantage over local retailers, while also depriving states and localities of hundreds of millions of dollars of legally due revenue each year."
Awwww, poor little politicians getting less money to spread to favored parties.
States should lower/eliminate sales taxes, so people keep more of their own money instead of it disappearing into a bureaucratic black hole.
99.9% of people are against taxation. I know this because if you made taxes optional, no one would pay them.
Of course the immoral among us are in favor of property confiscation from others by force, that is to say, taxes.
Best comment in any forum in the history of the world, ever.
Also, the plan may create jobs, but only those taken from the air travel industry and the auto travel industry. And they aren't doing too well, I believe.
I support the plan if:
1. It is paid for entirely by riders.
2. It does not use eminent domain to seize land.
My point was that it is sad that the federal government is so large that they need yet another bureaucrat to support all the other bureaucrats.
If you are in favor of this, you can pay the CTO's salary, and pay for all of the IT infrastructure supporting the hundreds of bloated bureaucracies in the federal government. But don't make me pay.
If you don't like a private company's CTO's directives, you are free to not use that company's products or services.
If you don't like a the government's CTO's directives, and you ignore them, you get fined and go to prison.
Since the government has no money except tax collections, they are simply taking money from one taxpayer to give to another. So unless you are going to take advantage of this program, you will be paying for it.
The fact that people are debating who should be the Technology Central Planner, instead of realizing that the very idea of one is silly and dangerous, shows that liberty is dead.