* Why would the Israeli government be less likely than ISPs to regulate P2P traffic, especially when governments are susceptible to lobby groups? "Net neutrality" is a sham.
* Why isn't an ISP allowed to regulate its own traffic? If there's a lot of P2P traffic interfering with the rest of its network, it's allowed to regulate it. College networks do it all the time.
* Why is this under "Your Rights Online?" You don't have a right to internet traffic. It's a commercial service you pay for.
As long as Google isn't selling my financial data to unscrupulous persons and having me get billed all kinds of money for things I don't want, or creating a dossier on all the weird shit I've searched for and forwarding it to my boss, what's the big deal?
My, my. Slashdot sure has changed.
If you let it slide that a company tracks everything you do, that then becomes the norm, and you no longer have any privacy anywhere. The opportunities for exploitation of this data are too numerous to list. You don't know whether or not Google is selling your data to unscrupulous persons, and with a CEO who says only wrongdoers have something to worry about when it comes to privacy, chances are that advertisers know all about you at this point.
What *does* freak me out is how my credit card company can ask me to confirm my height and weight when I talk to them on the phone, and when I ask them how the f**k they found out how much I weigh, they tell me that by law they're allowed to download all the information from the Department of Transit and so they know everything that's on my drivers license. THAT's the kind of stuff that I find extremely scary, and that's the kind of thing you can't do anything at all to prevent other than living in a shack in the mountains somewhere.
Let me get this straight. It's okay for a company to index all your information so that advertisers know everything you do, but it's "scary" when a credit card company does a good thing and uses info on your driver's license as a security confirmation over the phone? Are you for real?
There isn't a need for a "net neutrality" bill in any case. Pro-government people just want even more regulation. As private entities providing a service, sysadmins at ISPs can regulate their traffic however they choose. The internet isn't a right.
Why would it be wrong for them to do that? It's a service you're paying for as a convenience. It's not a right.
Government regulation of the internet is scary. Say goodbye to your precious torrent traffic as well-paid lobbyists tell bribed politicians to crack down on "economic terrorism."
What? It's some of the catchiest 8-bit music I've ever heard. Tornado Man's theme is stuck in my head right now. Of course it borrows cues from the previous games; that's intentional.
The difficulty is just right for an 8-bit Mega Man game, and the combinations that seem strange to you, like blocking the beams with concrete blocks, are taken from previous Mega Man games.
I really don't see how you could claim enemies are "barely present." It's flat-out not true.
Oh, man, I have to disagree. Mega Man 9 was probably the best "8-bit" Mega Man game, or at least second beneath Mega Man 2. Great level design and music.
Knockbacks no longer dismount players so that fucking druids can't turn into a Moonkin, dismount you, and then fly away while you plummet to your death.
To use any Meeting Stone, it is only required that the character's minimum level be 15. There is no maximum character level requirement for any Meeting Stone.
Uh, so? Now a high-level player doesn't have to ride over to the classic instance anymore.
Creatures attacking a player from behind can no longer cause players level 1-5 to be dazed, and have a reduced chance to cause players level 6-10 to be dazed
It's only the first 10 levels. What does it matter?
These regeneration rates have been increased by up to 200% for low level characters.
Again, so what? They're helping classes that are hard to start with, such as priests who run out of mana but have no built-in way to regenerate it like mages and warlocks do.
Any party member may mark targets
How is this a problem in any way?
So their aim seems to be to get players to level up faster... but I feel that's taking away some of the fun of the game.
Let me get this straight. You don't get dazed as much and your mana regens faster before level 10, and that's taking away the fun of the game for the rest of the 70 levels you play through? Get real. You're nitpicking just to have something to complain about.
There's a lot more going on in WoW than in EVE, which is just static ship models drifting around. WoW is essentially a 3D action game with terrain and line-of-sight, and you have to deal with all the network traffic and server-side processing that entails.
It's not hard to avoid lag when all that's going on is moving little static ship models around. There isn't even physical terrain with obstacles and line-of-sight to check for.
I really can't believe EVE fans are even trying to make this comparison.
You actually believe Blizzard should host 12,000,000 players on one server at the same time? And why is it so important to you that you be able to communicate with every single person logged into the game, anyway? WoW having a lot of users is not "of no consequence whatsoever." Just one high population WoW server has more active players than you'll find in all of EVE.
No bookmark manager (!), many other features missing. What reason is there to compel a Mac user to use this over Safari, which uses the same rendering engine and its own slightly faster JavaScript engine?
They use open standards because they want you using their online services and giving them personal data to index for advertising purposes. It's not out of the goodness of their hearts.
If you still think Google is an open company, where is the source code of their core business--their search engine? You don't see it, do you?
This power WILL be taken and abused by whoever controls it.
And the government is the more dangerous power. Far more dangerous.
Again you FAIL to understand that free markets DO NOT EXIST without government regulation to keep them free.
So what keeps the government in check? Governments are way more corrupt than a free market. I'm not painting everyone I disagree with as hating free markets, but there is a segment of pro-government people who despise free markets and think government intervention is the solution to everything, and a lot of Slashdot posters belong to that segment.
You want to replace one potentially corrupt power that we can regulate with our dollar with a power that controls and regulates us. That is stupid, ignorant bullshit.
P.S. My comment was at +5, so it's amusing to see closed-minded people band together to modbomb me because they have no counterargument. Doesn't bother me.
Uh, and just what the hell do you think the government is comprised of? Deities who are always neutral and never do anything wrong? It's made of people too, but they're privileged people who are making the laws, which makes them even more dangerous than the free market you so baselessly despise.
And are you seriously comparing an ISP's rightful regulation of its internet traffic to robbing, pillaging, raping, and assaulting? Give me a fucking break. I want sysadmins regulating their company's services--which they have every right to do--not bribed politicians who are above the law and will cater to every big financial donor's wishes. The internet isn't a right or a life necessity. It's a convenient service you pay for, like having a car or a television, and the free market keeps abuses in check because a company's livelihood depends on your dollar. A government, on the other hand, already forces you to pay it through taxes, and it makes its own special rules for itself so that it's not beholden to the law like the free market is. There's no incentive to please you as a customer. You're a citizen who will do what it says.
Could some of you stop giving the government so much power, please? We get it, you hate free markets and think government power solves absolutely everything by magic. Yep, history sure has shown how pure, fair, reliable, trustworthy, and incorruptible the government is. Uh-huh.
So the solution is to hand the internet over to the government, because they're oh-so-neutral and objective? You want corrupt politicians deciding on internet traffic instead of sysadmins? You really think a lobby group wouldn't bribe the government to regulate your precious Bittorrent traffic in order to prevent "economic terrorism" or that the government wouldn't monitor your private Facebook posts when they're already happy to continue wiretapping your phone without warrants?
Seriously, does anybody even think this shit through? I've never gotten the "net neutrality" (as phoney a name as the Patriot Act) argument or heard of a convincing example of abuse that proves it's even needed. The internet isn't a right. It's a service you pay for that an ISP can regulate however it wants. Don't like it, don't use that ISP. That you're actually arguing that an ISP has power over individuals is hysterical exaggeration. Somehow, people made do without the internet mere decades ago.
Can we please stop expanding government power for no fucking reason? Pretty please?
The problem is telling societies that you've 100% proven that they're causing global warming, and as a result, you're raising their taxes and enforcing standards on their ways of life. We don't know enough about our planet yet to claim such a thing with certainty or to justify that kind of power trip.
Slashdot Mirror
Bigger questions:
* Why would the Israeli government be less likely than ISPs to regulate P2P traffic, especially when governments are susceptible to lobby groups? "Net neutrality" is a sham.
* Why isn't an ISP allowed to regulate its own traffic? If there's a lot of P2P traffic interfering with the rest of its network, it's allowed to regulate it. College networks do it all the time.
* Why is this under "Your Rights Online?" You don't have a right to internet traffic. It's a commercial service you pay for.
Here's my response to your long, detailed post:
Stallman eats his own toe jam.
I don't remember reading that one in the Bill of Rights.
Too bad KDE is so horrible to use.
My, my. Slashdot sure has changed.
If you let it slide that a company tracks everything you do, that then becomes the norm, and you no longer have any privacy anywhere. The opportunities for exploitation of this data are too numerous to list. You don't know whether or not Google is selling your data to unscrupulous persons, and with a CEO who says only wrongdoers have something to worry about when it comes to privacy, chances are that advertisers know all about you at this point.
Let me get this straight. It's okay for a company to index all your information so that advertisers know everything you do, but it's "scary" when a credit card company does a good thing and uses info on your driver's license as a security confirmation over the phone? Are you for real?
Welcome to the new Slashdot, where everything Google does is great, and only people with something to hide would care about privacy.
There isn't a need for a "net neutrality" bill in any case. Pro-government people just want even more regulation. As private entities providing a service, sysadmins at ISPs can regulate their traffic however they choose. The internet isn't a right.
Why would it be wrong for them to do that? It's a service you're paying for as a convenience. It's not a right.
Government regulation of the internet is scary. Say goodbye to your precious torrent traffic as well-paid lobbyists tell bribed politicians to crack down on "economic terrorism."
What? It's some of the catchiest 8-bit music I've ever heard. Tornado Man's theme is stuck in my head right now. Of course it borrows cues from the previous games; that's intentional.
The difficulty is just right for an 8-bit Mega Man game, and the combinations that seem strange to you, like blocking the beams with concrete blocks, are taken from previous Mega Man games.
I really don't see how you could claim enemies are "barely present." It's flat-out not true.
Oh, man, I have to disagree. Mega Man 9 was probably the best "8-bit" Mega Man game, or at least second beneath Mega Man 2. Great level design and music.
Knockbacks no longer dismount players so that fucking druids can't turn into a Moonkin, dismount you, and then fly away while you plummet to your death.
Uh, so? Now a high-level player doesn't have to ride over to the classic instance anymore.
It's only the first 10 levels. What does it matter?
Again, so what? They're helping classes that are hard to start with, such as priests who run out of mana but have no built-in way to regenerate it like mages and warlocks do.
How is this a problem in any way?
Let me get this straight. You don't get dazed as much and your mana regens faster before level 10, and that's taking away the fun of the game for the rest of the 70 levels you play through? Get real. You're nitpicking just to have something to complain about.
There's a lot more going on in WoW than in EVE, which is just static ship models drifting around. WoW is essentially a 3D action game with terrain and line-of-sight, and you have to deal with all the network traffic and server-side processing that entails.
It's not hard to avoid lag when all that's going on is moving little static ship models around. There isn't even physical terrain with obstacles and line-of-sight to check for.
I really can't believe EVE fans are even trying to make this comparison.
You actually believe Blizzard should host 12,000,000 players on one server at the same time? And why is it so important to you that you be able to communicate with every single person logged into the game, anyway? WoW having a lot of users is not "of no consequence whatsoever." Just one high population WoW server has more active players than you'll find in all of EVE.
You honestly believe WoW servers only have 10,000 users each? Have you visited realms like Mal'ganis lately?
Also, WoW has a lot more action happening than EVE, which requires more network traffic.
No bookmark manager (!), many other features missing. What reason is there to compel a Mac user to use this over Safari, which uses the same rendering engine and its own slightly faster JavaScript engine?
They use open standards because they want you using their online services and giving them personal data to index for advertising purposes. It's not out of the goodness of their hearts.
If you still think Google is an open company, where is the source code of their core business--their search engine? You don't see it, do you?
Is Slashdot for or against copyrights this week? You know, since the GPL is a copyright license and relies on copyright law to have any power.
Good thing we have a pro-government liberal President and a pro-government liberal Congress to protect us from government abuses. Sigh.
Child pornography is a real crime.
And the government is the more dangerous power. Far more dangerous.
So what keeps the government in check? Governments are way more corrupt than a free market. I'm not painting everyone I disagree with as hating free markets, but there is a segment of pro-government people who despise free markets and think government intervention is the solution to everything, and a lot of Slashdot posters belong to that segment.
You want to replace one potentially corrupt power that we can regulate with our dollar with a power that controls and regulates us. That is stupid, ignorant bullshit.
P.S. My comment was at +5, so it's amusing to see closed-minded people band together to modbomb me because they have no counterargument. Doesn't bother me.
Uh, and just what the hell do you think the government is comprised of? Deities who are always neutral and never do anything wrong? It's made of people too, but they're privileged people who are making the laws, which makes them even more dangerous than the free market you so baselessly despise.
And are you seriously comparing an ISP's rightful regulation of its internet traffic to robbing, pillaging, raping, and assaulting? Give me a fucking break. I want sysadmins regulating their company's services--which they have every right to do--not bribed politicians who are above the law and will cater to every big financial donor's wishes. The internet isn't a right or a life necessity. It's a convenient service you pay for, like having a car or a television, and the free market keeps abuses in check because a company's livelihood depends on your dollar. A government, on the other hand, already forces you to pay it through taxes, and it makes its own special rules for itself so that it's not beholden to the law like the free market is. There's no incentive to please you as a customer. You're a citizen who will do what it says.
Could some of you stop giving the government so much power, please? We get it, you hate free markets and think government power solves absolutely everything by magic. Yep, history sure has shown how pure, fair, reliable, trustworthy, and incorruptible the government is. Uh-huh.
So the solution is to hand the internet over to the government, because they're oh-so-neutral and objective? You want corrupt politicians deciding on internet traffic instead of sysadmins? You really think a lobby group wouldn't bribe the government to regulate your precious Bittorrent traffic in order to prevent "economic terrorism" or that the government wouldn't monitor your private Facebook posts when they're already happy to continue wiretapping your phone without warrants?
Seriously, does anybody even think this shit through? I've never gotten the "net neutrality" (as phoney a name as the Patriot Act) argument or heard of a convincing example of abuse that proves it's even needed. The internet isn't a right. It's a service you pay for that an ISP can regulate however it wants. Don't like it, don't use that ISP. That you're actually arguing that an ISP has power over individuals is hysterical exaggeration. Somehow, people made do without the internet mere decades ago.
Can we please stop expanding government power for no fucking reason? Pretty please?
The problem is telling societies that you've 100% proven that they're causing global warming, and as a result, you're raising their taxes and enforcing standards on their ways of life. We don't know enough about our planet yet to claim such a thing with certainty or to justify that kind of power trip.
George Carlin performed the best bit on environmentalism that I've ever seen.
How do you know what is normal for our weather patterns? That's the debate.