I know lots of Slahshdotters (?) love them some Linux, but I've heard this story before, and it rarely ends up well. Servers and specialized machines, sure... they are mostly running Linux anyways, so it's not a problem. Government employees' computers? It's not only because Microsoft comes later on with enticing propositions, it's because people can't get used to distros like Ubuntu even when it's this user friendly or close to looking like Windows. For regular users, it's almost like learning another language, but usually for Linux there's no one there that speaks their language to teach them what to do. It's because there's a presumption, specially from power users, on how "regular people" use a computer. It's often assumed that they only need a browser, text editor, spreadsheet and a few other functionalities, but for the vast majority of cases it's more complicated than that. And it tends to be something that either doesn't exist on Linux, or that works very differently there.
So yeah... I guess good luck for Barcelona. But they should look into cases like Munich, Brazil and some others before jumping into that bandwagon.
Well, it worked for me. Here in Brazil, the ISP situation is not all that different from the US. What finally got me out of crappy cable and dsl service was a state wide private public partnership that is now offering fiber in most major cities in my state. We are not in the same net neutrality ending situation as the US is, but suffice to say that general ISP services are plenty crap. And in general brazilian politics and the public sector in general is as shitty as they come, but for some reason fiber Internet is a glaring exception. Fair prices, great upkeep, upload stream equal to download stream, no datacaps, great costumer service. Not that it'll be the same for all cases, but you know.
I don't think anyone should be questioning whether the monopolies will grow... they obviously will, with as much certainty that they won't be implementing obvious net neutrality ending measures right away. That's not the issue at hand, the issue is the cost of all that. Here's the thing: now thatbthis administration has completely bent over backwards to the likes of Comcast, signaling just how much they are willing to fuck consumers over in favor of their lobbying, any shitty corporation would be able to prosper. If the EPA dropped down any and every regulation in favor of industries polluting rivers and such, of course there would be way less costs cut from proper procedures to guarantee they wouldn't kill entire swaths of lands and people. So, if Comcast doesn't profit from the end of Net Neutrality, that's just incompetence. No one is questioning their ability to become even more profitable at the face of what's happened. The problem is them, and the FCC, fucking everyone over for that. FCC sold it's purpose and reason for being funded by taxpayer money to these monopolies. It's a fucking disgrace.
News of the death of the desktop have been largely exaggerated since the first affordable laptops came out... then when netbooks came out, then when ultrabooks came out, then when tablets came out, etc etc etc.
Here's the truth of the matter: Desktops are still a little bit less than half the market. And that's putting it against smartphones, laptops, tablets and all other computing devices, which adds up to a whole ton.
The answer is yes, but tech companies won't do it, because these things have nothing to do with consumer needs, but are instead strictly tied to stuff like marketing, and advertising. And it has huge sprawling effects that are hard to predict and figure out.
For companies like Google, Apple and Microsoft, software cycles don't live in a vacuum. They are tied to advertisement campaigns, keynotes, presentations, relationships with press, developers, business contracts, and a whole ton of other stuff people might not be aware of.
It takes far more than what the article is complaining about to tip the scale.
Google Maps is basically in an entire other category when compared to everything else, for good or bad.
Perhaps I'm wrong on this, but it's just how I face it. You don't need to be a Google fan, Apple hater or whatever to realize this. Apple has not invested as much time and money on mapping, nor have any other initiatives like HERE maps, etc.
To put it more simply, Apple Maps is just a service or an app from Apple for navigation. Google Maps represents an entire business division of Alphabet or something that encompases a whole ton of other stuff... it's a behemoth by itself.
One can argue that it's unecessary for things like navigation, which sure, could be. But I think it's accurate to say that no other mapping company has invested as much time, money or hired as many people and has such a large community backing to form the platform.
Starting with the fact that Google Maps is not a single entity, but intrinsically tied to Google Earth, Waze, Street View and a whole metric ton of 3rd party applications. Google acquired several other companies and technologies to tie into the service, whether people notice it or not.
Apple Maps gets their info from TomTom... and that's basically it. It's at best competing with platforms like MapQuest (which also uses TomTom's data), Bing Maps and HERE Maps.
Google Maps have some insane stuff like a Moon map, Mars map, underwater street view, Google Sky... they have hired satellites to update imagery, hired people on bikes, horses, camels, on foot, etc to take imagery of unaccessible areas, they have images inside some businesses, museums and whatnot. Whatever Apple maps or any other map services produce is only a fraction of what Google Maps does.
That's not to say it's the best one for your particular needs, nor the one that will more accurately represent your area. But it is what it is.
There is only one single thing needed in the law, proposal, act or regulation that is absolutely necessary, you can write it down, and only accept when it’s included there: Internet Service Providers are forbidden by law from discriminating types of data that goes through their services. Period.
It is this simple. Nothing open to interpretation, no double speak, no pretense.
If this is not explicitly there in the proposal, it’s bullshit. In this particular case it’s at best fluff... everything she is proposing there is already guaranteed. At worst, it could be opening an opportunity for anyone to block or reduce access to whatever they consider unlawful content, unlawful Internet traffic and “harmful devices”... it’s broad and clearly has some second intentions embedded there.
By the way, get ready people... you can bet that with the corporation friendly environment that this administration has created, SOPA will come back full force. This bullshit Open Internet Preservation Act might be the start of it.
If you are looking for something modern, with latest specs, short answer - nope.
If it can be an older device, for known chinese manufacturers (because all phones are manufactured in China to a degree), your only bet is probably a Windows Phone... which has been discontinued and is currently in a limbo.
Other than that, Ubuntu Touch is dead, there are some few privacy minded mobile distros still out there, but most options will require you to: install the OS yourself, pre-order something that is still not out, have a hard time actually buying a phone, and/or perhaps trust a company that will probably be making their phone with an unknown chinese manufacturer anyways. It's also worth noting that lots of companies tried to come up with either a hardened Android version for privacy, or a Linux distro that would run on a mobile device. It didn't work out too well, either because of technical limitations and speed smartphones are evolving, or for lack of costumers and support. I wouldn't recommend going for any small company alternatives right now because long term support is definitely not guaranteed.
Since you have so little requirements, might as well delegate navigation and browsing to another device, and just buy a dumbphone.
"a few suggested that the proposal was not so much a ban on words but recommendations to avoid some language to ease the path toward budget approval by Republicans."
Might I also suggest:
- Ample usage of drawings and kindergarten level explainers - McDonald's Happy Meal style; - "It's in the Bible"; - "It was reported on Fox and Friends", "there was an article on Breitbart about it"; - Some choice quotations from Mein Kampf, Charles Davenport, Paul Popenoe and Henry Goddard; - Other choice quotations from Schopenhauer's "On Women"; - Eliminating everything that might be miscontrued as "the reds" aka socialism, or liberalism; - Concluding the analysis with "Wake up sheeple!", "give up we won", "MAGA", etc.
A list of things I also expect from the current administration in the next few years:
- Don't get out of your home when there are planes flying around. It's prevention from getting unknowingly sprayed by comtrails filled with mind and sex altering chemicals; - We're closing every and any lab related to weather monitoring because they'd been known to also control minds; - Planes are now limited to certain routes around the world so that they don't fall over the borders of Earth. The underside of flatearth is populated by the lizard people and we don't wanna anger them; - Full revision of 9/11 which was probably planned and organized by the dems. Strong indications point out to a certain Hussain Obama II, a drug addict of inferior race known to have links to terrorists; - Country wide ban of vaccines, for it's link to child autism; - Usage of tinfoil fashion is now mandatory in all public spaces, as dictated by the Department of Homeland Security. It'll be wireless connected to the Internet for surveillance puposes, which should eliminate crime; - All foreign countries are to be advised that US military might is being underestimated because for some reason, enemy states - which is all states other than the US - still fail to consider the hidden nature of our bigfoot ninja army. Just because you guys haven't seen them in over decades of speculation, doesn't mean they are not there, just means how efficient they are; - We're reallocating tax spending from health, education, veterans, science, environment, transportation, housing, social security, food and agriculture to build a wall all around the US. Because there's no bigger threat than whatever is outside the US;
I'm not completely unsympathetic to what they are saying, but the perspective is all wrong, and it's not all that dissimilar than the whole discussion about piracy. Pointing fingers at all the wrong places will lead you to no results.
See, no matter how much you cry about this, Facebook, Twitter and Google are not "stealing your content" themselves. It's the users. And no matter how hard you try, there are provisions in law that protects these platforms from their users actions. This won't change because there are far bigger things in play here than your news rooms financial needs.
There's no viable route where one of these social networks giants will say "fine, we'll pay you some ammount of money because people who uses our platforms keeps sharing your content". Because if they open that Pandora's box, they'll also be taking responsibility for all the crap that is shared there. That's a whole other level of responsibility and liability that will be thrown against the companies to a point they won't be able to keep profitability anymore.
And do you really want to tie yourselves as employees of these corporations?
But much like piracy, the solution should be relatively easy to understand: you want your content to be monetized, you want to be compensated for it, you want a viable solution where your work is paid for - look at content creators that are not still living in the past.
What do YouTubers do? What newer platforms do? How are modern newsrooms sustaining themselves? How can you still make a profit when people are accessing your content without traditional methods of payment? The answer is there.
These press agencies have got to stop displaying such an incredible ammount of ignorance about the platforms they are trying to get a foothold on, and hire people who can come up with ways of monetizing their content on web platforms. It isn't a secret, and it's pretty much everywhere these days.
I'm sorry if the Internet has changed the funding dynamics of traditional news, entertainment industry in general, and other stuff - but face reality and fall in. This whinning will result in nothing.
Look moron, no one is saying the Internet will self implode, stop existing altogether, or be completely subverted the moment Net Neutrality passes. This bullshit that Pai and gang is trying to pass as truth is not what is at stake here, and anyone trying to pass this impression is apparently lacking the nuance of the message.
It's obvious, given how shrewd ISPs are, that the changes for the worse will get implemented slowly - as they were before. Remember people, the Internet didn't start out right away with datacaps, tiered plans, crap combos and whatnot that are all out there today that everyone accepted because they had no other option. In fact, americans might not know this, but there are still countries out there with Internet that does not impose datacaps, does not scam you out of your money by making Internet combo packages that you have to pay to get the better value, among other practices.
I'm personally an exception in my country among the few others that have access to the same fiber company, but you see, not only I don't have any datacaps, I also have the same speed for upload and download, I pay for Internet alone (no cable TV, no other crap), and my provider does not spam me with offers of other crap services that are also owned by it.
Much the same will happen with data discrimination once net neutrality falls. It'll get implemented slowly, and at a pace that avoids controversy as much as possible. Like lots of people already theorized and said, it'll probably start as an offer designed to look like you are taking advantage of the situation. The most likely scenario is that you'll be offered a fast lane to services tied to the ISP you are already paying for. Get 4K streaming without stuttering or lag with our streaming channels exclusively! Get unthetered access to services tied to our brand. Get unlimited transfers with our cloud based options. This kinda crap.
And then they start slowly but surely limiting the bandwidth, the caps, and the overall connection to the competition. And when enough people have migrated to their own services and competition died off, they can treat you like shit once again because you don't have an option. This is what always happen. This is what is already happening. It'll just gain another dimension.
It might look like a good deal at first, but it stiffles competition and it actively diverts people into walled gardens situation, which is specially bad given the current state on how people use the Internet, and how much critical reasoning is expected from regular users. You are fooling no one with that sorta crap Powell.
Ajit Pai, as many in this administration, is just trying to co-opt the narrative and build some alternate reality that agrees with his own agenda. It's just sad that some people still listens to their garbage.
It would've outdone the Wii already if it wasn't for shortages. And if Nintendo figures out multiplayer components - which is something they should've solved a long time ago already -, releases the virtual console already and brings more general entertainment apps to cover tablet-like functionality (it already has Hulu, but it must bring others like Netflix, YouTube, etc), it will far surpass Wii sales. Because it'll essencially replace Android tablets. They can easily engulf an entire product category if they offer enough functionality.
The road is clear, the architecture is favorable, and it should be easy enough for Nintendo to make the Switch an indispensable product. It's basically a nVidia Shield TV in tablet form with the backing of a huge gaming corporation... they have both the high end technical aspect on their side plus the game franchise backing. If they can't take further advantage of that position, it'll be because of pure incompetence.
Forget 1-2-Switch. Agreed, Nintendo shouldn't have based their ads on it.
That's a showcase game meant to serve as a display of what's possible to do with the console system that should never have been sold as a game, it's just there for developers to know the accessories and functionalities they could use for their own games.
Look for trailers of titles like Zelda Breath of the Wild, Doom, Skyrim, Mario Odyssey, Splatoon 2, Project Arms and Nindies if you or your kids are into indie games. Should be enough of a display for what you should expect from the console/portable hybrid.
For me, it's well worth it, but I'm waiting to see if Nintendo will revise the hardware before jumping in. Either way, if you and your kids liked the games on the Wii on the Wii U, it's a no brainer. Definitely get one when you can.
Just so you know, the Switch had more releases in it's first year than most console and portable systems up to date. So yeah, your comment makes no sense.
I know this is supposed to be kinda tongue in cheek, but most animes have specific background artists that will be asked to portray some scenery as faithfully as possible, including stuff like worn down buildings, crusty old signs, overgrown lawns, faded out street signaling, corroded paintjobs... and yes, power lines. There are lots of titles that are specifically tied to a city, or even a specific neighborhoods... well, much like several TV series and movies.
But picking half a dozen titles stretched over 2 decades or more that have power lines in them and saying it's an "obsession" has to be a joke right? Do people even realize hundreds of titles are released every year?
In any case, it's not an obsession by any means... apart from Lain because it's thematic (it symbolizes how everything is connected), for the vast majority of titles it is just a staple of urban environments. It's part of the scenery. From another perspective, obsessive behaviour would be trying to hide them when they are quite obviously there.
The analogy is stupid, badly thought out, and has no place to be compared to Net Neutrality. Doesn't matter if the companies are fighting, you can get a Roku stick, an Apple TV, Hulu, stick to a tabletop HTPC or whatever if you don't like what Google and Amazon are offering. This is about ISPs treating data equally without distinguishing it, not about what corporations choose to offer in their own proprietary devices.
How can people still be this stupid on this issue after how long we have been discussing this. Stop sharing moronic arguments, please.
What is it with people these days and their lack of logic sense and understanding what they are talking about. Can't this guy see that he's proving exactly the opposite with his comment? "It's not clear that automation in the restaurant industry will lead to job losses"
You make a service more convenient with automation, which attracts more costumers and whatnot. Sure. But how can you reach the conclusion that it won't lead to job losses stopping there? Are you some sort of idiot?
Here, let me complete to you. Those costumers are often choosing your restaurant over others because of convenience. As they are going there because they don't want to interact with regular human employees, this means they are choosing automated services, which might hire more people for overhead in your business, but it'll also be killing other businesses that don't have automated services.
This is no different than Amazon over big retail chain stores. Just because one restaurant is hiring a couple more employees to deal with automated services overhead doesn't mean that jobs are not being lost overall. At some point, the market gets saturated and you end up in a situation where several businesses that used to hire a lot of people to attend costumers gets replaced by businesses that have automation as the main business driver plus few human employees for the rest.
It's the same as saying that only because Amazon is hiring more slav- I mean, warehouse workers, robots are not replacing jobs. Nevermind multiple stores from small to big closing doors because they can't compete with Amazon.
Not that people need to be reminded of this, but a huge part of this administration is irresponsible and dangerous ignorance or pure maliciousness to the benefit of few, which has not changed anything so far quite unfortunately. I hope the EFF, ACLU and the lawsuits that are coming against the FCC results in something. Unfortunately though, the justice system isn't showing many signs that it's all that much different from the administration too.
Slashdot Mirror
I know lots of Slahshdotters (?) love them some Linux, but I've heard this story before, and it rarely ends up well.
Servers and specialized machines, sure... they are mostly running Linux anyways, so it's not a problem.
Government employees' computers? It's not only because Microsoft comes later on with enticing propositions, it's because people can't get used to distros like Ubuntu even when it's this user friendly or close to looking like Windows.
For regular users, it's almost like learning another language, but usually for Linux there's no one there that speaks their language to teach them what to do.
It's because there's a presumption, specially from power users, on how "regular people" use a computer. It's often assumed that they only need a browser, text editor, spreadsheet and a few other functionalities, but for the vast majority of cases it's more complicated than that.
And it tends to be something that either doesn't exist on Linux, or that works very differently there.
So yeah... I guess good luck for Barcelona. But they should look into cases like Munich, Brazil and some others before jumping into that bandwagon.
Well, it worked for me.
Here in Brazil, the ISP situation is not all that different from the US.
What finally got me out of crappy cable and dsl service was a state wide private public partnership that is now offering fiber in most major cities in my state.
We are not in the same net neutrality ending situation as the US is, but suffice to say that general ISP services are plenty crap.
And in general brazilian politics and the public sector in general is as shitty as they come, but for some reason fiber Internet is a glaring exception. Fair prices, great upkeep, upload stream equal to download stream, no datacaps, great costumer service.
Not that it'll be the same for all cases, but you know.
It's neither democratic, nor a republic.
I don't think anyone should be questioning whether the monopolies will grow... they obviously will, with as much certainty that they won't be implementing obvious net neutrality ending measures right away.
That's not the issue at hand, the issue is the cost of all that.
Here's the thing: now thatbthis administration has completely bent over backwards to the likes of Comcast, signaling just how much they are willing to fuck consumers over in favor of their lobbying, any shitty corporation would be able to prosper.
If the EPA dropped down any and every regulation in favor of industries polluting rivers and such, of course there would be way less costs cut from proper procedures to guarantee they wouldn't kill entire swaths of lands and people.
So, if Comcast doesn't profit from the end of Net Neutrality, that's just incompetence.
No one is questioning their ability to become even more profitable at the face of what's happened. The problem is them, and the FCC, fucking everyone over for that.
FCC sold it's purpose and reason for being funded by taxpayer money to these monopolies. It's a fucking disgrace.
News of the death of the desktop have been largely exaggerated since the first affordable laptops came out... then when netbooks came out, then when ultrabooks came out, then when tablets came out, etc etc etc.
Here's the truth of the matter: Desktops are still a little bit less than half the market. And that's putting it against smartphones, laptops, tablets and all other computing devices, which adds up to a whole ton.
Here comes the yearly "will 20xx be the year of Linux desktop?" :P
One would think that 10+ years of this would've been enough...
The answer is yes, but tech companies won't do it, because these things have nothing to do with consumer needs, but are instead strictly tied to stuff like marketing, and advertising. And it has huge sprawling effects that are hard to predict and figure out.
For companies like Google, Apple and Microsoft, software cycles don't live in a vacuum. They are tied to advertisement campaigns, keynotes, presentations, relationships with press, developers, business contracts, and a whole ton of other stuff people might not be aware of.
It takes far more than what the article is complaining about to tip the scale.
Google Maps is basically in an entire other category when compared to everything else, for good or bad.
Perhaps I'm wrong on this, but it's just how I face it.
You don't need to be a Google fan, Apple hater or whatever to realize this.
Apple has not invested as much time and money on mapping, nor have any other initiatives like HERE maps, etc.
To put it more simply, Apple Maps is just a service or an app from Apple for navigation. Google Maps represents an entire business division of Alphabet or something that encompases a whole ton of other stuff... it's a behemoth by itself.
One can argue that it's unecessary for things like navigation, which sure, could be.
But I think it's accurate to say that no other mapping company has invested as much time, money or hired as many people and has such a large community backing to form the platform.
Starting with the fact that Google Maps is not a single entity, but intrinsically tied to Google Earth, Waze, Street View and a whole metric ton of 3rd party applications. Google acquired several other companies and technologies to tie into the service, whether people notice it or not.
Apple Maps gets their info from TomTom... and that's basically it. It's at best competing with platforms like MapQuest (which also uses TomTom's data), Bing Maps and HERE Maps.
Google Maps have some insane stuff like a Moon map, Mars map, underwater street view, Google Sky... they have hired satellites to update imagery, hired people on bikes, horses, camels, on foot, etc to take imagery of unaccessible areas, they have images inside some businesses, museums and whatnot. Whatever Apple maps or any other map services produce is only a fraction of what Google Maps does.
That's not to say it's the best one for your particular needs, nor the one that will more accurately represent your area. But it is what it is.
There is only one single thing needed in the law, proposal, act or regulation that is absolutely necessary, you can write it down, and only accept when it’s included there: Internet Service Providers are forbidden by law from discriminating types of data that goes through their services. Period.
It is this simple. Nothing open to interpretation, no double speak, no pretense.
If this is not explicitly there in the proposal, it’s bullshit. In this particular case it’s at best fluff... everything she is proposing there is already guaranteed. At worst, it could be opening an opportunity for anyone to block or reduce access to whatever they consider unlawful content, unlawful Internet traffic and “harmful devices”... it’s broad and clearly has some second intentions embedded there.
By the way, get ready people... you can bet that with the corporation friendly environment that this administration has created, SOPA will come back full force. This bullshit Open Internet Preservation Act might be the start of it.
If you are looking for something modern, with latest specs, short answer - nope.
If it can be an older device, for known chinese manufacturers (because all phones are manufactured in China to a degree), your only bet is probably a Windows Phone... which has been discontinued and is currently in a limbo.
Other than that, Ubuntu Touch is dead, there are some few privacy minded mobile distros still out there, but most options will require you to: install the OS yourself, pre-order something that is still not out, have a hard time actually buying a phone, and/or perhaps trust a company that will probably be making their phone with an unknown chinese manufacturer anyways.
It's also worth noting that lots of companies tried to come up with either a hardened Android version for privacy, or a Linux distro that would run on a mobile device. It didn't work out too well, either because of technical limitations and speed smartphones are evolving, or for lack of costumers and support.
I wouldn't recommend going for any small company alternatives right now because long term support is definitely not guaranteed.
Since you have so little requirements, might as well delegate navigation and browsing to another device, and just buy a dumbphone.
What's a "Windows Store"?
"a few suggested that the proposal was not so much a ban on words but recommendations to avoid some language to ease the path toward budget approval by Republicans."
Might I also suggest:
- Ample usage of drawings and kindergarten level explainers - McDonald's Happy Meal style;
- "It's in the Bible";
- "It was reported on Fox and Friends", "there was an article on Breitbart about it";
- Some choice quotations from Mein Kampf, Charles Davenport, Paul Popenoe and Henry Goddard;
- Other choice quotations from Schopenhauer's "On Women";
- Eliminating everything that might be miscontrued as "the reds" aka socialism, or liberalism;
- Concluding the analysis with "Wake up sheeple!", "give up we won", "MAGA", etc.
I see... the same Gawker that led an active campaign against the SCAM SCAM SCAM that were crowdfunding initiatives. That's hillarious.
A list of things I also expect from the current administration in the next few years:
- Don't get out of your home when there are planes flying around. It's prevention from getting unknowingly sprayed by comtrails filled with mind and sex altering chemicals;
- We're closing every and any lab related to weather monitoring because they'd been known to also control minds;
- Planes are now limited to certain routes around the world so that they don't fall over the borders of Earth. The underside of flatearth is populated by the lizard people and we don't wanna anger them;
- Full revision of 9/11 which was probably planned and organized by the dems. Strong indications point out to a certain Hussain Obama II, a drug addict of inferior race known to have links to terrorists;
- Country wide ban of vaccines, for it's link to child autism;
- Usage of tinfoil fashion is now mandatory in all public spaces, as dictated by the Department of Homeland Security. It'll be wireless connected to the Internet for surveillance puposes, which should eliminate crime;
- All foreign countries are to be advised that US military might is being underestimated because for some reason, enemy states - which is all states other than the US - still fail to consider the hidden nature of our bigfoot ninja army. Just because you guys haven't seen them in over decades of speculation, doesn't mean they are not there, just means how efficient they are;
- We're reallocating tax spending from health, education, veterans, science, environment, transportation, housing, social security, food and agriculture to build a wall all around the US. Because there's no bigger threat than whatever is outside the US;
Useless whinning from dying dinossaurs.
I'm not completely unsympathetic to what they are saying, but the perspective is all wrong, and it's not all that dissimilar than the whole discussion about piracy. Pointing fingers at all the wrong places will lead you to no results.
See, no matter how much you cry about this, Facebook, Twitter and Google are not "stealing your content" themselves. It's the users. And no matter how hard you try, there are provisions in law that protects these platforms from their users actions. This won't change because there are far bigger things in play here than your news rooms financial needs.
There's no viable route where one of these social networks giants will say "fine, we'll pay you some ammount of money because people who uses our platforms keeps sharing your content".
Because if they open that Pandora's box, they'll also be taking responsibility for all the crap that is shared there. That's a whole other level of responsibility and liability that will be thrown against the companies to a point they won't be able to keep profitability anymore.
And do you really want to tie yourselves as employees of these corporations?
But much like piracy, the solution should be relatively easy to understand: you want your content to be monetized, you want to be compensated for it, you want a viable solution where your work is paid for - look at content creators that are not still living in the past.
What do YouTubers do? What newer platforms do? How are modern newsrooms sustaining themselves? How can you still make a profit when people are accessing your content without traditional methods of payment?
The answer is there.
These press agencies have got to stop displaying such an incredible ammount of ignorance about the platforms they are trying to get a foothold on, and hire people who can come up with ways of monetizing their content on web platforms. It isn't a secret, and it's pretty much everywhere these days.
I'm sorry if the Internet has changed the funding dynamics of traditional news, entertainment industry in general, and other stuff - but face reality and fall in. This whinning will result in nothing.
"to better protect data and accelerate efforts to use cloud-based technology"
Look moron, no one is saying the Internet will self implode, stop existing altogether, or be completely subverted the moment Net Neutrality passes. This bullshit that Pai and gang is trying to pass as truth is not what is at stake here, and anyone trying to pass this impression is apparently lacking the nuance of the message.
It's obvious, given how shrewd ISPs are, that the changes for the worse will get implemented slowly - as they were before.
Remember people, the Internet didn't start out right away with datacaps, tiered plans, crap combos and whatnot that are all out there today that everyone accepted because they had no other option. In fact, americans might not know this, but there are still countries out there with Internet that does not impose datacaps, does not scam you out of your money by making Internet combo packages that you have to pay to get the better value, among other practices.
I'm personally an exception in my country among the few others that have access to the same fiber company, but you see, not only I don't have any datacaps, I also have the same speed for upload and download, I pay for Internet alone (no cable TV, no other crap), and my provider does not spam me with offers of other crap services that are also owned by it.
Much the same will happen with data discrimination once net neutrality falls. It'll get implemented slowly, and at a pace that avoids controversy as much as possible. Like lots of people already theorized and said, it'll probably start as an offer designed to look like you are taking advantage of the situation. The most likely scenario is that you'll be offered a fast lane to services tied to the ISP you are already paying for. Get 4K streaming without stuttering or lag with our streaming channels exclusively! Get unthetered access to services tied to our brand. Get unlimited transfers with our cloud based options. This kinda crap.
And then they start slowly but surely limiting the bandwidth, the caps, and the overall connection to the competition. And when enough people have migrated to their own services and competition died off, they can treat you like shit once again because you don't have an option. This is what always happen. This is what is already happening. It'll just gain another dimension.
It might look like a good deal at first, but it stiffles competition and it actively diverts people into walled gardens situation, which is specially bad given the current state on how people use the Internet, and how much critical reasoning is expected from regular users.
You are fooling no one with that sorta crap Powell.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/...
https://arstechnica.com/tech-p...
Ajit Pai, as many in this administration, is just trying to co-opt the narrative and build some alternate reality that agrees with his own agenda. It's just sad that some people still listens to their garbage.
It would've outdone the Wii already if it wasn't for shortages. And if Nintendo figures out multiplayer components - which is something they should've solved a long time ago already -, releases the virtual console already and brings more general entertainment apps to cover tablet-like functionality (it already has Hulu, but it must bring others like Netflix, YouTube, etc), it will far surpass Wii sales. Because it'll essencially replace Android tablets. They can easily engulf an entire product category if they offer enough functionality.
The road is clear, the architecture is favorable, and it should be easy enough for Nintendo to make the Switch an indispensable product. It's basically a nVidia Shield TV in tablet form with the backing of a huge gaming corporation... they have both the high end technical aspect on their side plus the game franchise backing.
If they can't take further advantage of that position, it'll be because of pure incompetence.
Forget 1-2-Switch. Agreed, Nintendo shouldn't have based their ads on it.
That's a showcase game meant to serve as a display of what's possible to do with the console system that should never have been sold as a game, it's just there for developers to know the accessories and functionalities they could use for their own games.
Look for trailers of titles like Zelda Breath of the Wild, Doom, Skyrim, Mario Odyssey, Splatoon 2, Project Arms and Nindies if you or your kids are into indie games. Should be enough of a display for what you should expect from the console/portable hybrid.
For me, it's well worth it, but I'm waiting to see if Nintendo will revise the hardware before jumping in. Either way, if you and your kids liked the games on the Wii on the Wii U, it's a no brainer. Definitely get one when you can.
There.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Just so you know, the Switch had more releases in it's first year than most console and portable systems up to date. So yeah, your comment makes no sense.
I know this is supposed to be kinda tongue in cheek, but most animes have specific background artists that will be asked to portray some scenery as faithfully as possible, including stuff like worn down buildings, crusty old signs, overgrown lawns, faded out street signaling, corroded paintjobs... and yes, power lines.
There are lots of titles that are specifically tied to a city, or even a specific neighborhoods... well, much like several TV series and movies.
But picking half a dozen titles stretched over 2 decades or more that have power lines in them and saying it's an "obsession" has to be a joke right? Do people even realize hundreds of titles are released every year?
In any case, it's not an obsession by any means... apart from Lain because it's thematic (it symbolizes how everything is connected), for the vast majority of titles it is just a staple of urban environments. It's part of the scenery. From another perspective, obsessive behaviour would be trying to hide them when they are quite obviously there.
The analogy is stupid, badly thought out, and has no place to be compared to Net Neutrality.
Doesn't matter if the companies are fighting, you can get a Roku stick, an Apple TV, Hulu, stick to a tabletop HTPC or whatever if you don't like what Google and Amazon are offering.
This is about ISPs treating data equally without distinguishing it, not about what corporations choose to offer in their own proprietary devices.
How can people still be this stupid on this issue after how long we have been discussing this. Stop sharing moronic arguments, please.
What is it with people these days and their lack of logic sense and understanding what they are talking about. Can't this guy see that he's proving exactly the opposite with his comment?
"It's not clear that automation in the restaurant industry will lead to job losses"
You make a service more convenient with automation, which attracts more costumers and whatnot. Sure. But how can you reach the conclusion that it won't lead to job losses stopping there? Are you some sort of idiot?
Here, let me complete to you. Those costumers are often choosing your restaurant over others because of convenience. As they are going there because they don't want to interact with regular human employees, this means they are choosing automated services, which might hire more people for overhead in your business, but it'll also be killing other businesses that don't have automated services.
This is no different than Amazon over big retail chain stores. Just because one restaurant is hiring a couple more employees to deal with automated services overhead doesn't mean that jobs are not being lost overall. At some point, the market gets saturated and you end up in a situation where several businesses that used to hire a lot of people to attend costumers gets replaced by businesses that have automation as the main business driver plus few human employees for the rest.
It's the same as saying that only because Amazon is hiring more slav- I mean, warehouse workers, robots are not replacing jobs. Nevermind multiple stores from small to big closing doors because they can't compete with Amazon.
This isn't rocket science, people.
Not that people need to be reminded of this, but a huge part of this administration is irresponsible and dangerous ignorance or pure maliciousness to the benefit of few, which has not changed anything so far quite unfortunately.
I hope the EFF, ACLU and the lawsuits that are coming against the FCC results in something. Unfortunately though, the justice system isn't showing many signs that it's all that much different from the administration too.