If politicians can run around and suddenly start holding site operators liable for one kind of content, how long until they start holding them liable for all types of damning content? Site operators might just be trying to get ahead of the curve, because of the giant can of worms that FOSTA-SESTA opened up.
If someone wants to cry about First Amendment violations, this is really the avenue you need to approach it from. This is the government forcing a proxy to censor speech by making that proxy liable for any criminal activity that speech perpetrates.
Exactly wth is wrong with the current absentee ballot system? Or are they trying to imply that the mail isn't routinely and reliably delivered/sent to and from military bases abroad?
Heck, the only way to even remotely make this phone app accurate and secure is to _mail_ the service men and women a unique passkey to log their vote with. But even then, it's data in a database connected to the bloody internet, not to mention that they'd have only the word of the service provider that there votes were credited anonymously and not tied to their identity.
A thousand dollar phone better last six or seven years (even if you have to drop it off at a service center every couple years to have the battery replaced).
Meanwhile, you're right on that money that phones from the likes of OnePlus continue to pump out features and performance at a price tag fully half that of the major flagships.
Assuming lab burgers don't beat them to it. Technically if all the "vegetarian" is worried about is animal slaughter then a lab burger would be the perfect substitute - assuming the economics of scale can bring the price down from $400 a burger.
I would which would have less of a carbon footprint, mass market lab burgers or mass market plant burgers?
Here comes Samsung Sandroid and the Samsung Store!
Well, Google does sell some premium handsets with their own branding now. And there's a couple third parties (OnePlus?) that sell a pretty clean stock Android. (Obviously you could still unlock any other handset and deal with custom roms and all the issues there in to get a clean install). I wish someone would go after the carriers for all the privacy invading and battery eating bloatware that they load down phones with.
Trump and the feds have pretty much abdicated or outright endorsed monopolies here in the U.S. (and let's be clear, the feds have been doing so long before the reign of Trump), so it's no surprise that he'd act butt hurt over the EU leveling a large fine against an "American" company. Plus, I'm sure he intends to use it the headlines as justification for more illegal tariffs against the EU.
Had to RTFA to see the nasty part of this change: Premium users may get cut down to 2 screens at a time from the current 4. Premium already offers Ultra HD content across 4 screens. So this is basically another way for Netflix to hike their streaming prices, not offer customers more choice.
Everything in Gmail, 365, Hotmail, the Cloud that is not encrypted IS being accessed by who knows who. And if that is not OK changes need to be made.
IIRC including the government. They left a nice big loophole in place in a 1986 law that considers any data of yours left on a server more than 180 days to be "abandoned" and thus removed from all expectations of privacy. The house passed The Email Privacy Act in Feb 2017, but it never got brought up in the Senate https://www.charlotteobserver....
Yeah, they destroyed Blockbuster, every other DVD by mail rental service, and most every other local store with their monopoly and now they're letting their own waste away as well. The only real alternative left is Redbox, but, that's mainly popular movies & new releases. Gamefly rents some movies to, but, it's also just mainly the super popular ones/new releases.
There's a large section of filmography that's just completely un-rentable these days.
Well, it's a burden on small businesses, but, it's also a business opportunity. It should be easy enough for some company to build a database of tax rates and keep it up to date, and then feed that into a web service or finance application that can provide applicable rates by address and manage the collection and payment of said taxes. The question is, how much are they going to charge other businesses to use their product?
Well, I am not everyone at slashdot, you can tone down the rabid fanboyism a bit. I'm fully willing to acknowledge that iOS has 54% of the mobile OS market share while Android has 45%. http://gs.statcounter.com/os-m... Hence why I believe the developer, even if he does happen to be as anti-Apple as you claim, isn't wrong about not being able to leave money on the table when it comes to the question of whether or not to develop his application for iOS or not.
No, I don't expect Apple to host a market place app on the App Store any more than I expect Google Play to make the Amazon App Store downloadable through their storefront. What I pointed out (or meant to point out) is that:
As for the "restricting content providers", Apple has many content-provider Apps on the iOS App Store. Netflix and Hulu immediately come to mind, as does HBO Go, Many Network and Cable-Channel Apps, DirecTV Now, and most Cable Providers' Apps. ALL of those Apps are FREE; plus, NONE of that content, most of which requires a subscription with the App Publisher of one sort or another, makes Apple ONE THIN DIME. But of course they make it easy for iTunes.
1) Apple uses their platform to advantage iTunes (as considered being a separate application compared to the App Store, whether they are integrated or not) over other entertainment applications by forbidding those applications from offering In-App rentals or purchases. This has nothing to do with subscription based entertainment applications (though there is some overlap when considering Amazon Prime & Amazon Movies). This appears to be potentially monopolistic, but, it is slightly off-topic (even though I brought it up first) since we're supposedly talking about developers and Apps here.
2) What you've pointed out is that Apple will allow a user to place the phone in developer mode and then compile source code or manually install a pre-compiled ipa using a PC based application. This is beyond most users and this is not true side-loading. What Android allows is turning off a simple setting in the security settings (Allow Installation from Unknown Sources) and then opening the apk on the phone/tablet or via a browser link - no PC or Developer mode required.
While I do see evidence of some third party App Stores for iOS (TUTUApp, TweakBox, FlekStore) the fact that they talk about downloading paid apps for free (something I would not condone) points out their illegitimacy/illegality. Others (Cydia, GetJar, Appland) apparently require jailbreaking the device in order to use. And again, since there is no side-loading in iOS, installing any of these is prohibitive or difficult beyond most users.
I wouldn't really say iOS is easier to develop for, I would say it's easier to QA for.
I'll tell you why: Because, unlike the VAST majority of cheapskate Android owners (most of which are kids or poor adults) WON'T PAY for Apps, and only look to see what they can leech for Free, or PIRATE. Conversely, although iOS owners certainly enjoy a good, free App, they are MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more likely to reward Devs. that produce a useful App with their actual MONEY.
There are many premium smartphones running Android that cost just as much if not more than iPhones, and they often have hardware that is arguably or just straight out superior to an equivalently priced iPhone.
There are plenty of paid apps on Android marketplaces and plenty of people that have no issues paying money for them. Using broad categorizations and name calling does not help your argument.
You will just argue that iOS owners are duped into purchasing Apps they don't like, because Apple doesn't have "Free Trials". Well, that argument ignores the fact that Apple has ALWAYS had a 14-day money-back for ALL purchases, INCLUDING iOS APPS. They don't make a big deal about it; but it is there, and you don't have to "be
IIRC pumped hydro has a few drawbacks though.
It tends to require ideal geographical features: aka a steep hill with a large reservoir up top to pump the water to, and streams to replenish the water in the reservoirs that gets lost to evaporation.
It can cause impact on local wildlife (but, I suppose the same it true for most anything)
But it also has a lag in it's ability to provide power on demand. The big one in Bath County Virginia that gets mentioned when the subject comes up still has a five to ten minute lag time https://thinkprogress.org/the-...
This is still advantageous over traditional 20-30 minutes of coal/natural gas, but nothing compared to the Tesla Australia battery, which can respond is as little as 4 seconds. https://www.washingtonpost.com...
A mixing of the two solutions (when and where possible) might be the most ideal approach. Pumped Hydro for capacity and cost, with a large enough battery capacity that can respond to outages quickly and last long enough until the hydro manages to spin up.
I'd argue that there's some distinctions you're failing to make here.
The iOS Dev that has to dev for iOS because "that's where the money is" is probably referring to the market penetration of iPhones and iPads, not the Apple App Store which comes along with the iPhone.
Second, why do developers prefer to develop for iOS over Android? It's most definitely not because of the App Store. It's because there is only one manufacturer for iOS devices and only two product lines they have to worry about, the iPhone and the iPad. Both of which run the same or exceedingly similar versions of iOS. It significantly reduces the amount of QA they need to (or at least should) do when testing their apps.
Given the opportunity, I'd wager that many iOS Devs would jump at the chance to use a different distribution platform for their iOS apps. And, you know it's not just apps. Apple forbids any kind of third party application that even remotely resembles a marketplace. You can't rent or buy movies via the Amazon Movies or Google Play Movies Apps on an iPhone - you have to instead purchase/rent the content via another device or PC before you can stream it to your iOS device. No such restriction for iTunes though.
Valve's Steam Link App was booted off the App Store because it dared to display a list of games that looked like a marketplace - even though the games were all PC games and not software for iOS (I don't even think that they were available for purchase either).
All that does show that Apple is using their position as a hardware manufacturer and operating system developer to advantage their own software and entertainment marketplaces over those of it's competitors, either by completely preventing outside marketplaces from operating or by hampering the usage there of.
Unlike Microsoft however in the days when it got smacked around, Apple doesn't have near as much of the smart phone market share as MS had of the PC OS market share back then (which I believe was close to or over 90%). So you're not wrong in saying that consumers have a choice whether or not to buy an iOS or an Android device. But, this question is more about the developers choice of how to distribute their application. On iOS it's the App Store or not at all. So one can argue that the App Store has a 100% monopoly on distribution of iOS software. In other words, a developer that runs afoul of Apple's censors could find their app and themselves permanently banned from the App Store, flushing untold man hours down the toilet and leaving that developer with no alternatives. You also can't have anyone else start a new marketplace and say "Hey, I can provide a secure marketplace for transactions and ensure applications are trustworthy more efficiently than Apple, so I'm only going to charge a 10% commission".
A "link tax" is absurd, the site publishing the link is doing the linked site a favor by driving traffic to their site and potentially increasing ad revenue. It's the sites that repost entire news articles verbatim that are stealing content.
An "Upload Filter" that checks all uploaded content for copyright infringement? Is the EU also going to provide a web service with an insanely extensive database and develop the content verification system and APIs with which to check uploaded content against? If not, this is an absurd barrier to entry for any start-up, particularly when it has fines attached (which I believe last I read about this article it did, those the linked story doesn't mention them so maybe I'm wrong).
Not that I'm a fan of Facebook, but, dead people don't use Facebook and view advertisements, so I don't see what value Facebook gets out of maintaining their profiles. Even living people, FB has no actual obligation to host their content and profiles. They do so because they gather the advertising dollars and sell the consumer analytics.
IIRC there were talks of a Sprint acquiring T-Mobile USA back in 2015 and it died off due to regulatory concerns, so what's different now? Oh right, people that are far easier to bribe are now in office.
They had also tried to sell off T-Mobile USA to AT&T back in 2011, but the DOJ blocked that and T-Mobile netted some very nice contract termination bonuses (both money and spectrum) from AT&T in the process.
Deutsche Telekom (T-Mobile's Germany based parent company) has been crying that T-Mobile USA is bleeding money and trying to off-load it on someone else since the first failed sale attempt back in 2011. But maybe it's all just a smoke screen to try and get regulators to back off from them so they can make a fast buck.
Gambling is a recognized addiction. Several video games use techniques similar to those employed by gambling to increase player engagement and retention.
In reality, gaming addiction is just another form of gambling addiction; it's the same psychological triggers that are used to cause both.
A child has to be diagnosed by a certified and trained psychologist with gender dysphoria before being able to receive treatment with prescription hormone supplements and blockers. 3 years old is probably too young for such a diagnosis.
Meanwhile, children that do suffer from gender dysphoria whose parents refuse to acknowledge it, (or worse, whose parents display an attitude of bigotry against it) often end up committing suicide or blaming their parents for "fucking up their lives" as you so eloquently put it.
The best hope a gender dysphoric child has of having a normal life is to receive love, acceptance, and treatment prior to puberty (ie before all the hormones get released and cause their body to mature in a way that is foreign to them).
Also let us scoop up extra cash from the Ads we can get you to watch, as well as get you invested in our exclusive programming so that you keep coming back for more.
I doubt that there are enough progressive and/or uncorrupted politicians in California to get this measure passed. Otoh, if it grabs and holds enough media attention and spotlight thanks to Facebooks recent screwups and almost continual unveiling of more scandalous occurrences maybe it actually has a chance.
So, they intend to force Kaspersky from being one of the top antivirus providers (and probably the only one that refuses to install NSA/CIA backdoors) into... what? Do they think they'll put them out of business?
Meanwhile, they use their baseless allegations to convince the rest of the populous to install one of the other PC security packages that have backdoors in place for the local spy agencies...
Is that a joke? I mean everything was fine until 2015 when this whole concept took root, so you expect that it will rock along fine until November 2018 and then we are all dead?
I'm just guessing here.. But it seems to me that returning to a pre-NN regulation environment won't be a huge issue even then. Where I expect to see a problem or two that NN would have prevented, I don't see how they won't be effectively dealt with by the FCC as necessary.
Everything was not "just fine" prior to the 2015 ruling, otherwise we wouldn't have had the 2015 ruling. The FCC was handling cases of discriminatory service provision since 2003. The 2015 ruling was the end result of a long line of cases against various ISPs for pulling shady stuff like AT&T limiting access to FaceTime, one ISP restricting consumer access to Vonage VoIP service, Verizon throttling Netflix and Youtube, Comcast throttling/breaking VPN services, etc. Just because maybe you didn't experience any of the BS that was going on doesn't mean that it didn't affect plenty of other consumers. And since we don't have reasonable broadband competition in many markets (especially rural ones) consumers don't have a choice when it comes to broadband providers, so they need NN protections to keep from being extorted.
Slashdot Mirror
Remember FOSTA-SESTA? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
If politicians can run around and suddenly start holding site operators liable for one kind of content, how long until they start holding them liable for all types of damning content? Site operators might just be trying to get ahead of the curve, because of the giant can of worms that FOSTA-SESTA opened up.
If someone wants to cry about First Amendment violations, this is really the avenue you need to approach it from. This is the government forcing a proxy to censor speech by making that proxy liable for any criminal activity that speech perpetrates.
Exactly wth is wrong with the current absentee ballot system? Or are they trying to imply that the mail isn't routinely and reliably delivered/sent to and from military bases abroad?
Heck, the only way to even remotely make this phone app accurate and secure is to _mail_ the service men and women a unique passkey to log their vote with. But even then, it's data in a database connected to the bloody internet, not to mention that they'd have only the word of the service provider that there votes were credited anonymously and not tied to their identity.
A thousand dollar phone better last six or seven years (even if you have to drop it off at a service center every couple years to have the battery replaced).
Meanwhile, you're right on that money that phones from the likes of OnePlus continue to pump out features and performance at a price tag fully half that of the major flagships.
Assuming lab burgers don't beat them to it. Technically if all the "vegetarian" is worried about is animal slaughter then a lab burger would be the perfect substitute - assuming the economics of scale can bring the price down from $400 a burger.
I would which would have less of a carbon footprint, mass market lab burgers or mass market plant burgers?
Here comes Samsung Sandroid and the Samsung Store!
Well, Google does sell some premium handsets with their own branding now. And there's a couple third parties (OnePlus?) that sell a pretty clean stock Android. (Obviously you could still unlock any other handset and deal with custom roms and all the issues there in to get a clean install). I wish someone would go after the carriers for all the privacy invading and battery eating bloatware that they load down phones with.
Trump and the feds have pretty much abdicated or outright endorsed monopolies here in the U.S. (and let's be clear, the feds have been doing so long before the reign of Trump), so it's no surprise that he'd act butt hurt over the EU leveling a large fine against an "American" company. Plus, I'm sure he intends to use it the headlines as justification for more illegal tariffs against the EU.
Had to RTFA to see the nasty part of this change: Premium users may get cut down to 2 screens at a time from the current 4. Premium already offers Ultra HD content across 4 screens. So this is basically another way for Netflix to hike their streaming prices, not offer customers more choice.
Everything in Gmail, 365, Hotmail, the Cloud that is not encrypted IS being accessed by who knows who. And if that is not OK changes need to be made.
IIRC including the government. They left a nice big loophole in place in a 1986 law that considers any data of yours left on a server more than 180 days to be "abandoned" and thus removed from all expectations of privacy. The house passed The Email Privacy Act in Feb 2017, but it never got brought up in the Senate https://www.charlotteobserver....
Yeah, they destroyed Blockbuster, every other DVD by mail rental service, and most every other local store with their monopoly and now they're letting their own waste away as well. The only real alternative left is Redbox, but, that's mainly popular movies & new releases. Gamefly rents some movies to, but, it's also just mainly the super popular ones/new releases.
There's a large section of filmography that's just completely un-rentable these days.
Soon to be available on AWS - Interstate Sales Tax Evaluation, Collection, and Remittance Services.
Well, it's a burden on small businesses, but, it's also a business opportunity. It should be easy enough for some company to build a database of tax rates and keep it up to date, and then feed that into a web service or finance application that can provide applicable rates by address and manage the collection and payment of said taxes. The question is, how much are they going to charge other businesses to use their product?
No, I don't expect Apple to host a market place app on the App Store any more than I expect Google Play to make the Amazon App Store downloadable through their storefront. What I pointed out (or meant to point out) is that:
As for the "restricting content providers", Apple has many content-provider Apps on the iOS App Store. Netflix and Hulu immediately come to mind, as does HBO Go, Many Network and Cable-Channel Apps, DirecTV Now, and most Cable Providers' Apps. ALL of those Apps are FREE; plus, NONE of that content, most of which requires a subscription with the App Publisher of one sort or another, makes Apple ONE THIN DIME. But of course they make it easy for iTunes.
1) Apple uses their platform to advantage iTunes (as considered being a separate application compared to the App Store, whether they are integrated or not) over other entertainment applications by forbidding those applications from offering In-App rentals or purchases. This has nothing to do with subscription based entertainment applications (though there is some overlap when considering Amazon Prime & Amazon Movies). This appears to be potentially monopolistic, but, it is slightly off-topic (even though I brought it up first) since we're supposedly talking about developers and Apps here.
2) What you've pointed out is that Apple will allow a user to place the phone in developer mode and then compile source code or manually install a pre-compiled ipa using a PC based application. This is beyond most users and this is not true side-loading. What Android allows is turning off a simple setting in the security settings (Allow Installation from Unknown Sources) and then opening the apk on the phone/tablet or via a browser link - no PC or Developer mode required.
While I do see evidence of some third party App Stores for iOS (TUTUApp, TweakBox, FlekStore) the fact that they talk about downloading paid apps for free (something I would not condone) points out their illegitimacy/illegality. Others (Cydia, GetJar, Appland) apparently require jailbreaking the device in order to use. And again, since there is no side-loading in iOS, installing any of these is prohibitive or difficult beyond most users.
I wouldn't really say iOS is easier to develop for, I would say it's easier to QA for.
I'll tell you why: Because, unlike the VAST majority of cheapskate Android owners (most of which are kids or poor adults) WON'T PAY for Apps, and only look to see what they can leech for Free, or PIRATE. Conversely, although iOS owners certainly enjoy a good, free App, they are MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more likely to reward Devs. that produce a useful App with their actual MONEY.
There are many premium smartphones running Android that cost just as much if not more than iPhones, and they often have hardware that is arguably or just straight out superior to an equivalently priced iPhone.
There are plenty of paid apps on Android marketplaces and plenty of people that have no issues paying money for them. Using broad categorizations and name calling does not help your argument.
You will just argue that iOS owners are duped into purchasing Apps they don't like, because Apple doesn't have "Free Trials". Well, that argument ignores the fact that Apple has ALWAYS had a 14-day money-back for ALL purchases, INCLUDING iOS APPS. They don't make a big deal about it; but it is there, and you don't have to "be
IIRC pumped hydro has a few drawbacks though.
It tends to require ideal geographical features: aka a steep hill with a large reservoir up top to pump the water to, and streams to replenish the water in the reservoirs that gets lost to evaporation.
It can cause impact on local wildlife (but, I suppose the same it true for most anything)
But it also has a lag in it's ability to provide power on demand. The big one in Bath County Virginia that gets mentioned when the subject comes up still has a five to ten minute lag time https://thinkprogress.org/the-...
This is still advantageous over traditional 20-30 minutes of coal/natural gas, but nothing compared to the Tesla Australia battery, which can respond is as little as 4 seconds. https://www.washingtonpost.com...
A mixing of the two solutions (when and where possible) might be the most ideal approach. Pumped Hydro for capacity and cost, with a large enough battery capacity that can respond to outages quickly and last long enough until the hydro manages to spin up.
Going public like this may be Musk's attempt at distracting the board from the huge Q2 losses.
I'd argue that there's some distinctions you're failing to make here.
The iOS Dev that has to dev for iOS because "that's where the money is" is probably referring to the market penetration of iPhones and iPads, not the Apple App Store which comes along with the iPhone.
Second, why do developers prefer to develop for iOS over Android? It's most definitely not because of the App Store. It's because there is only one manufacturer for iOS devices and only two product lines they have to worry about, the iPhone and the iPad. Both of which run the same or exceedingly similar versions of iOS. It significantly reduces the amount of QA they need to (or at least should) do when testing their apps.
Given the opportunity, I'd wager that many iOS Devs would jump at the chance to use a different distribution platform for their iOS apps. And, you know it's not just apps. Apple forbids any kind of third party application that even remotely resembles a marketplace. You can't rent or buy movies via the Amazon Movies or Google Play Movies Apps on an iPhone - you have to instead purchase/rent the content via another device or PC before you can stream it to your iOS device. No such restriction for iTunes though.
Valve's Steam Link App was booted off the App Store because it dared to display a list of games that looked like a marketplace - even though the games were all PC games and not software for iOS (I don't even think that they were available for purchase either).
All that does show that Apple is using their position as a hardware manufacturer and operating system developer to advantage their own software and entertainment marketplaces over those of it's competitors, either by completely preventing outside marketplaces from operating or by hampering the usage there of.
Unlike Microsoft however in the days when it got smacked around, Apple doesn't have near as much of the smart phone market share as MS had of the PC OS market share back then (which I believe was close to or over 90%). So you're not wrong in saying that consumers have a choice whether or not to buy an iOS or an Android device. But, this question is more about the developers choice of how to distribute their application. On iOS it's the App Store or not at all. So one can argue that the App Store has a 100% monopoly on distribution of iOS software. In other words, a developer that runs afoul of Apple's censors could find their app and themselves permanently banned from the App Store, flushing untold man hours down the toilet and leaving that developer with no alternatives. You also can't have anyone else start a new marketplace and say "Hey, I can provide a secure marketplace for transactions and ensure applications are trustworthy more efficiently than Apple, so I'm only going to charge a 10% commission".
A "link tax" is absurd, the site publishing the link is doing the linked site a favor by driving traffic to their site and potentially increasing ad revenue. It's the sites that repost entire news articles verbatim that are stealing content.
An "Upload Filter" that checks all uploaded content for copyright infringement? Is the EU also going to provide a web service with an insanely extensive database and develop the content verification system and APIs with which to check uploaded content against? If not, this is an absurd barrier to entry for any start-up, particularly when it has fines attached (which I believe last I read about this article it did, those the linked story doesn't mention them so maybe I'm wrong).
Not that I'm a fan of Facebook, but, dead people don't use Facebook and view advertisements, so I don't see what value Facebook gets out of maintaining their profiles. Even living people, FB has no actual obligation to host their content and profiles. They do so because they gather the advertising dollars and sell the consumer analytics.
IIRC there were talks of a Sprint acquiring T-Mobile USA back in 2015 and it died off due to regulatory concerns, so what's different now? Oh right, people that are far easier to bribe are now in office.
They had also tried to sell off T-Mobile USA to AT&T back in 2011, but the DOJ blocked that and T-Mobile netted some very nice contract termination bonuses (both money and spectrum) from AT&T in the process.
Deutsche Telekom (T-Mobile's Germany based parent company) has been crying that T-Mobile USA is bleeding money and trying to off-load it on someone else since the first failed sale attempt back in 2011. But maybe it's all just a smoke screen to try and get regulators to back off from them so they can make a fast buck.
Gambling is a recognized addiction. Several video games use techniques similar to those employed by gambling to increase player engagement and retention.
In reality, gaming addiction is just another form of gambling addiction; it's the same psychological triggers that are used to cause both.
Pardon, I meant psychiatrist. Psychologists can't issue prescriptions.
A child has to be diagnosed by a certified and trained psychologist with gender dysphoria before being able to receive treatment with prescription hormone supplements and blockers. 3 years old is probably too young for such a diagnosis.
Meanwhile, children that do suffer from gender dysphoria whose parents refuse to acknowledge it, (or worse, whose parents display an attitude of bigotry against it) often end up committing suicide or blaming their parents for "fucking up their lives" as you so eloquently put it.
The best hope a gender dysphoric child has of having a normal life is to receive love, acceptance, and treatment prior to puberty (ie before all the hormones get released and cause their body to mature in a way that is foreign to them).
Also let us scoop up extra cash from the Ads we can get you to watch, as well as get you invested in our exclusive programming so that you keep coming back for more.
I doubt that there are enough progressive and/or uncorrupted politicians in California to get this measure passed. Otoh, if it grabs and holds enough media attention and spotlight thanks to Facebooks recent screwups and almost continual unveiling of more scandalous occurrences maybe it actually has a chance.
So, they intend to force Kaspersky from being one of the top antivirus providers (and probably the only one that refuses to install NSA/CIA backdoors) into... what? Do they think they'll put them out of business?
Meanwhile, they use their baseless allegations to convince the rest of the populous to install one of the other PC security packages that have backdoors in place for the local spy agencies...
Is that a joke? I mean everything was fine until 2015 when this whole concept took root, so you expect that it will rock along fine until November 2018 and then we are all dead?
I'm just guessing here.. But it seems to me that returning to a pre-NN regulation environment won't be a huge issue even then. Where I expect to see a problem or two that NN would have prevented, I don't see how they won't be effectively dealt with by the FCC as necessary.
Everything was not "just fine" prior to the 2015 ruling, otherwise we wouldn't have had the 2015 ruling. The FCC was handling cases of discriminatory service provision since 2003. The 2015 ruling was the end result of a long line of cases against various ISPs for pulling shady stuff like AT&T limiting access to FaceTime, one ISP restricting consumer access to Vonage VoIP service, Verizon throttling Netflix and Youtube, Comcast throttling/breaking VPN services, etc. Just because maybe you didn't experience any of the BS that was going on doesn't mean that it didn't affect plenty of other consumers. And since we don't have reasonable broadband competition in many markets (especially rural ones) consumers don't have a choice when it comes to broadband providers, so they need NN protections to keep from being extorted.