Probably? Of course they got unemployment.. It's specifically for people who are laid off (of fired without cause).
No shit it's a First World Problem.. That's why why so many people move here from shitty countries. The US imports 1,000,000 (and has peaked at 2,000,000 in recent decades) people a year who have decided HERE is better than THERE.
HERE is better than THERE because we run shit differently. Fuck you and your obvious anti-west bias.
Right.. Because it's greed to not pay to employ people you don't need. Guess every single company on Earth is greedy since they don't employ people they don't need..
You have a number of employees that you need to get the job done and that's how many you employ.
Yeah. And you think those yachts are free? How many people are employed building one of those boats? Hundreds? All down the supply chain, that's probably not an unreasonable guesstimate. All of that $120M is plowed right back into the economy at the lowest level you can - Construction jobs.. That money is spent in the community and works its way up..
Bill Gates work, while beneficial to humanity, doesn't create a whole lot of jobs. A few scientists and aid workers I suppose. Ellison's money is directly beneficial to American workers.
How many people to crew the yacht? 23 full time jobs. Just for his boat! His previous yacht (now owned by David Geffen) has a crew of 45.
You are, clearly, a luddite. Probably the same type of asshole who got all irritated when cars gained the ability to travel at 30mph.. BUT 15MPH is enough for anyone!
that's why we're discussing this. It's too expensive to get internet out to the boonies. Just like it was too expensive to get electricity and phones there. We did it anyway because it was good for the country. A connected, modern and well educated rural population was much less likely to do boneheaded things at the polls.
Bullshit. I've covered 100 sq miles of some of the most inaccessible and remote areas in my county. Your statement is false. It's false because the cost is the burdensome regulations and the competition with companies getting taxpayer subsidies. It's damn hard to compete with a company that isn't actually spending its own money..
Internet is not capitalistic in the United States.. It's crony-capitalism where some companies (AT&T) get HUGE taxpayer subsidies and the small guys get nothing.. I don't want subsidies, but AT&T should be getting ZERO.. They are a hugely profitable company. There is no damn reason us WISPs should have to compete against a billion dollar company that has access to what should be taxpayer funds.
By the end of 2014, America will have been charged about $400 billion by the local phone incumbents, Verizon, AT&T and CenturyLink, for a fiber optic future that never showed up. And though it varies by state, counting the taxes, fees and surcharges that you have paid every month (many of these fees are actually revenues to the company or taxes on the company that you paid), it comes to about $4000-$5000.00 per household from 1992-2014, and that’s the low number.
Not precisely what I said, but close enough to the ball park that my $300B is "plausible". I'll keep looking.. I know I saw a $300B tagged to AT&T from WAAAY back when.. Even before the Internet existed, we were connecting computers to networks, of course. I want to say that the promise of 45 mpbs was made somewhere around 1985.
Oh, and I'm not quoting the HuffPost (which is a shitty rag, IMHO), but rather a book they reviewed or featured or something.. Anyway the quote is from the book.
WISPS are doing just fine.. If you want a realistic boost, give them the same access rights to the poles that the big carriers have.
This sounds to me like more money and more subsidies to the same fucking telcos that have been screwing us over all along.
Capitalism always finds a way.. Crony-capitalism not so much...
$300 billion.. That's the amount of subsidies and tax breaks AT&T has been given to deliver on their promise of "45 megabits for everyone". They delivered NONE of it in the time frame they were given.. Not a single fucking residential household. We supposed to give them more? Or are we supposed to put governments in charge of internet? Yeah, all those fiscally responsible local/county/state governments we have? Fuck that too.
Make life easier on the WISPs (more frequency, less regulation, less paperwork, less red-tape in general, and you'll have your coverage.. I'm not suggesting there should be ZERO oversight, but the amount of red-tape we already have to deal with is ridiculous.
No subsidies for ANYONE. Just less paperwork and easier access to telephone poles and possibly federal/state lands for transmitters... That's all we need..
I don't think an actor is worth $1 million an episode or $25 million for a single movie. I'm not going to eat those costs by continually paying more and more while 90% of the money made goes to suits in offices who don't do anything but "facilitate" things.
That's because you're a socialist asshole. If an actor can rake in $200M for a movie using his name alone (think Johnny Depp) you don't think they deserve a cut of that?
Goofiness aside, there was a time that any movie that had Tom Cruise in it would do a $100M just because he was in it... How nice that you have decided he's not worth a portion of that.. What are you gonna do? Force him to be in the movie? No? Well, then he gets to set his price.. Don't like it? Tough shit..
Are you a moron? It's not the old people that don't think Google is tracking them.. It's the young idiots who have never lived in a world where you weren't being tracked. Most teens/young adults I speak to act surprised that someone would monetize their personal information. Too young to have a proper world view.. Hell, most of them don't even have full time jobs and still live at home (and no, it's not because there are no jobs, it's because these assholes haven't figured out personal responsibility yet because they've been coddled since birth). i.e. They haven't actually begun to live in the real world, so they don't have the slightest clue on what's really going on.
You're an idiot. We didn't execute the entire German Army. The top guys were hanged, guys who ran the death camps were hanged.. Standouts who were particularly brutal were hanged... The average rank and file were sent home.
The moment you said the cleaning ladies should be sent to jail is the moment everyone else learned you were a wack-a-doodle.
2. Write to bank instructing them to immediately halt all sharing of your data with these organisations as is your legal right under Article 18 of the EU GDPR. https://gdpr-info.eu/art-18-gd...
Kinda funny you post a direct link to the document and yet it's clear you either haven't read it or don't possess an adult level of reading comprehension.
I read it and it's quite clear that as long as the data is accurate, necessary for the collector to conduct business, and not illegally obtained, they can tell you to go suck a bag of dicks.
There are all sorts of reasons your bank might need to share data with a 3rd party. Credit reporting, collections, etc... Your desire to block that apparently isn't always supreme.
I'll grant you that the EU does seem to be way more concerned with the privacy of it's citizens, at least on an economic level, but it would appear that right is not paramount to all valid reasons.
I'd further wager that if EU companies begin to suffer under the restrictions you do have, they'll be relaxed the moment it becomes clear the EU might slip in global trade.. Nobody wants to see their wealth being drained (well, besides the US obviously as we just can't seem to send enough cash to China) and nobody wants to dive into a recession. The more onerous (even if just) your laws and red tape become, the harder it is for companies to compete with low cost alternatives.
Economics and social policies tend to act a bit like a pendulum swinging back and forth until some reasonable middle ground is reached. But even that stability is usually short lived as times change and economic/global crises come and go.
The GDPR is a relatively new policy and nobody is sure what the total ramifications are yet. I'd be a little less cocky about it...
And when someone fucks up and puts a name into "the computer" with a spelling error and the computer matches it to you, you'll be singing a different tune. You can't freeze cash..
Many millennials are morons. Just because shit hasn't happened to you yet, doesn't mean it can't/won't... I use a card, but you can bet your ass I have an emergency stack of cash...
If a credit card is stolen it can be cancelled quickly and any fraudelent purchases dispuated with a cap on damage, the credit card company will take absorb the damage..
Absolute horse shit... The card company takes ZERO damages. The fraudulent funds are pulled back out of the merchant's account. Visa/MC aren't on the hook for anything, unless they can't get the money back from the merchant.. Only then do they pony up cash.. I have a merchant account and the TOS are quite clear that I'm responsible for ensuring that a card is used only by the authorized person.
I had a customer dispute a charge (short story: the bank was in error and double processed her card, not I) and within a few moments of her calling her issuing bank the funds were pulled back out of my account.. Took me 3 months to prove that I had a right to that money.. I got it back eventually, but it was a giant pain-in-the-ass.
Soon all TV will do this, better idea is force the TV through a proxy that filters ads...
Why give the television access to your network at all? The manufacturers only support a particular generation for 3-4years at most. For the vast majority of people, that television is going to be in their home significantly longer than that.
Get a Roku, get an Apple TV, get a Fire stick - use that device to feed the shows to the flat screen.
Good points, but if you don't think Apple TV and Firestick will try this bullshit, eventually, then..... Hell, maybe they already do.. I don't know..
Then how do home users receive their Internet? And how do they get the bundle discount on said Internet?
Mostly via cable, of course.. The GP is probably a millennial moron who doesn't understand the world past his own front door. Of course DSL (telco) is still very popular. Fixed wireless is growing. In the 8 years I've been doing it I've never had a month where I had a decline in subscribers... Last, but not least, is satellite internet which is sucky but better than dial-up (which still exists but has declined to the point where we can probably ignore it).
OTA television cannot have targeted ads because it's a one way transmission.
True
Nobody has cable any more.
And then you went all dumb.... There are still roughly 83,000,000 households in the US that pay for either cable or IPTV. At what point did 83,000,000 (a number greater than the total population of Germany) become "nobody"? This number is declining, to be sure, but it's going to be a long, slow, and drawn out death..
Perhaps.. But the great thing about capitalism is that if the people don't want this crap and one company builds a TV that doesn't do it, they'll take the lion's share of the market..
Or... perhaps you should develop your idea and come up with a squid box that requires minimal user interaction.. You could sell it as the "TV ad blocker" or some such thing.. All it takes is one great idea...
Slashdot Mirror
Well done, you get your kool-aid today!
Of course.. Your socialism is different/better than Stalin's or Mao's. Fuck you, we aren't falling for it..
The Green New Deal would cause famine and starvation that would rival what Stalin did.
Probably? Of course they got unemployment.. It's specifically for people who are laid off (of fired without cause).
No shit it's a First World Problem.. That's why why so many people move here from shitty countries. The US imports 1,000,000 (and has peaked at 2,000,000 in recent decades) people a year who have decided HERE is better than THERE.
HERE is better than THERE because we run shit differently. Fuck you and your obvious anti-west bias.
Right.. Because it's greed to not pay to employ people you don't need. Guess every single company on Earth is greedy since they don't employ people they don't need..
You have a number of employees that you need to get the job done and that's how many you employ.
Why does basic logic escape you people?
Fuck off, socialist! Your kind will be dealt with in course...
Yeah. And you think those yachts are free? How many people are employed building one of those boats? Hundreds? All down the supply chain, that's probably not an unreasonable guesstimate. All of that $120M is plowed right back into the economy at the lowest level you can - Construction jobs.. That money is spent in the community and works its way up..
Bill Gates work, while beneficial to humanity, doesn't create a whole lot of jobs. A few scientists and aid workers I suppose. Ellison's money is directly beneficial to American workers.
How many people to crew the yacht? 23 full time jobs. Just for his boat! His previous yacht (now owned by David Geffen) has a crew of 45.
It was funny when the first 3 people made this joke.. You're like #10.. Not funny anymore.. You're a hack.
You are, clearly, a luddite. Probably the same type of asshole who got all irritated when cars gained the ability to travel at 30mph.. BUT 15MPH is enough for anyone!
Then you have a business opportunity.. Start a WISP. Why does the government have to solve this problem?
that's why we're discussing this. It's too expensive to get internet out to the boonies. Just like it was too expensive to get electricity and phones there. We did it anyway because it was good for the country. A connected, modern and well educated rural population was much less likely to do boneheaded things at the polls.
Bullshit. I've covered 100 sq miles of some of the most inaccessible and remote areas in my county. Your statement is false. It's false because the cost is the burdensome regulations and the competition with companies getting taxpayer subsidies. It's damn hard to compete with a company that isn't actually spending its own money..
Internet is not capitalistic in the United States.. It's crony-capitalism where some companies (AT&T) get HUGE taxpayer subsidies and the small guys get nothing.. I don't want subsidies, but AT&T should be getting ZERO.. They are a hugely profitable company. There is no damn reason us WISPs should have to compete against a billion dollar company that has access to what should be taxpayer funds.
AT&T's market cap is 226 billion. Your 300 billion claim is not plausible. If you got that somewhere, post the link, so we can know who the liars are.
I'll dig it up, but it was since 1990.. So, yeah it is plausible. But I don't blame you for asking for a citation (which I am trying to find).
Take a look at this: https://www.huffingtonpost.com...
By the end of 2014, America will have been charged about $400 billion by the local phone incumbents, Verizon, AT&T and CenturyLink, for a fiber optic future that never showed up. And though it varies by state, counting the taxes, fees and surcharges that you have paid every month (many of these fees are actually revenues to the company or taxes on the company that you paid), it comes to about $4000-$5000.00 per household from 1992-2014, and that’s the low number.
Not precisely what I said, but close enough to the ball park that my $300B is "plausible". I'll keep looking.. I know I saw a $300B tagged to AT&T from WAAAY back when.. Even before the Internet existed, we were connecting computers to networks, of course. I want to say that the promise of 45 mpbs was made somewhere around 1985.
Oh, and I'm not quoting the HuffPost (which is a shitty rag, IMHO), but rather a book they reviewed or featured or something.. Anyway the quote is from the book.
WISPS are doing just fine.. If you want a realistic boost, give them the same access rights to the poles that the big carriers have.
This sounds to me like more money and more subsidies to the same fucking telcos that have been screwing us over all along.
Capitalism always finds a way.. Crony-capitalism not so much...
$300 billion.. That's the amount of subsidies and tax breaks AT&T has been given to deliver on their promise of "45 megabits for everyone". They delivered NONE of it in the time frame they were given.. Not a single fucking residential household. We supposed to give them more? Or are we supposed to put governments in charge of internet? Yeah, all those fiscally responsible local/county/state governments we have? Fuck that too.
Make life easier on the WISPs (more frequency, less regulation, less paperwork, less red-tape in general, and you'll have your coverage.. I'm not suggesting there should be ZERO oversight, but the amount of red-tape we already have to deal with is ridiculous.
No subsidies for ANYONE. Just less paperwork and easier access to telephone poles and possibly federal/state lands for transmitters... That's all we need..
I don't think an actor is worth $1 million an episode or $25 million for a single movie. I'm not going to eat those costs by continually paying more and more while 90% of the money made goes to suits in offices who don't do anything but "facilitate" things.
That's because you're a socialist asshole. If an actor can rake in $200M for a movie using his name alone (think Johnny Depp) you don't think they deserve a cut of that?
Goofiness aside, there was a time that any movie that had Tom Cruise in it would do a $100M just because he was in it... How nice that you have decided he's not worth a portion of that.. What are you gonna do? Force him to be in the movie? No? Well, then he gets to set his price.. Don't like it? Tough shit..
Are you a moron? It's not the old people that don't think Google is tracking them.. It's the young idiots who have never lived in a world where you weren't being tracked. Most teens/young adults I speak to act surprised that someone would monetize their personal information. Too young to have a proper world view.. Hell, most of them don't even have full time jobs and still live at home (and no, it's not because there are no jobs, it's because these assholes haven't figured out personal responsibility yet because they've been coddled since birth). i.e. They haven't actually begun to live in the real world, so they don't have the slightest clue on what's really going on.
This bullshit has been going on for decades.. They started telling us how bad eggs were back in the late 80's or early 90's.
Eggs are good.. Eggs are bad.. Back and forth so many times.. At this point they can all go screw themselves.. I'm eating eggs.
You're an idiot. We didn't execute the entire German Army. The top guys were hanged, guys who ran the death camps were hanged.. Standouts who were particularly brutal were hanged... The average rank and file were sent home.
The moment you said the cleaning ladies should be sent to jail is the moment everyone else learned you were a wack-a-doodle.
What? In many states you can buy prepaid VISA cards at the 7-11 in denominations up to $500.. Nobody is pulling any IDs..
We could fix this. Stored value cards already exist, you can top them up with cash.
And just how the fuck are you going to do that in a cashless society? The whole point of this article is about millenials not using cash...
2. Write to bank instructing them to immediately halt all sharing of your data with these organisations as is your legal right under Article 18 of the EU GDPR. https://gdpr-info.eu/art-18-gd...
Kinda funny you post a direct link to the document and yet it's clear you either haven't read it or don't possess an adult level of reading comprehension.
I read it and it's quite clear that as long as the data is accurate, necessary for the collector to conduct business, and not illegally obtained, they can tell you to go suck a bag of dicks.
There are all sorts of reasons your bank might need to share data with a 3rd party. Credit reporting, collections, etc... Your desire to block that apparently isn't always supreme.
I'll grant you that the EU does seem to be way more concerned with the privacy of it's citizens, at least on an economic level, but it would appear that right is not paramount to all valid reasons.
I'd further wager that if EU companies begin to suffer under the restrictions you do have, they'll be relaxed the moment it becomes clear the EU might slip in global trade.. Nobody wants to see their wealth being drained (well, besides the US obviously as we just can't seem to send enough cash to China) and nobody wants to dive into a recession. The more onerous (even if just) your laws and red tape become, the harder it is for companies to compete with low cost alternatives.
Economics and social policies tend to act a bit like a pendulum swinging back and forth until some reasonable middle ground is reached. But even that stability is usually short lived as times change and economic/global crises come and go.
The GDPR is a relatively new policy and nobody is sure what the total ramifications are yet. I'd be a little less cocky about it...
And when someone fucks up and puts a name into "the computer" with a spelling error and the computer matches it to you, you'll be singing a different tune. You can't freeze cash..
Many millennials are morons. Just because shit hasn't happened to you yet, doesn't mean it can't/won't... I use a card, but you can bet your ass I have an emergency stack of cash...
If a credit card is stolen it can be cancelled quickly and any fraudelent purchases dispuated with a cap on damage, the credit card company will take absorb the damage..
Absolute horse shit... The card company takes ZERO damages. The fraudulent funds are pulled back out of the merchant's account. Visa/MC aren't on the hook for anything, unless they can't get the money back from the merchant.. Only then do they pony up cash.. I have a merchant account and the TOS are quite clear that I'm responsible for ensuring that a card is used only by the authorized person.
I had a customer dispute a charge (short story: the bank was in error and double processed her card, not I) and within a few moments of her calling her issuing bank the funds were pulled back out of my account.. Took me 3 months to prove that I had a right to that money.. I got it back eventually, but it was a giant pain-in-the-ass.
Soon all TV will do this, better idea is force the TV through a proxy that filters ads...
Why give the television access to your network at all? The manufacturers only support a particular generation for 3-4years at most. For the vast majority of people, that television is going to be in their home significantly longer than that.
Get a Roku, get an Apple TV, get a Fire stick - use that device to feed the shows to the flat screen.
Good points, but if you don't think Apple TV and Firestick will try this bullshit, eventually, then..... Hell, maybe they already do.. I don't know..
Nobody has cable any more.
Then how do home users receive their Internet? And how do they get the bundle discount on said Internet?
Mostly via cable, of course.. The GP is probably a millennial moron who doesn't understand the world past his own front door. Of course DSL (telco) is still very popular. Fixed wireless is growing. In the 8 years I've been doing it I've never had a month where I had a decline in subscribers... Last, but not least, is satellite internet which is sucky but better than dial-up (which still exists but has declined to the point where we can probably ignore it).
OTA television cannot have targeted ads because it's a one way transmission.
True
Nobody has cable any more.
And then you went all dumb.... There are still roughly 83,000,000 households in the US that pay for either cable or IPTV. At what point did 83,000,000 (a number greater than the total population of Germany) become "nobody"? This number is declining, to be sure, but it's going to be a long, slow, and drawn out death..
Soon all TV will do this...
Perhaps.. But the great thing about capitalism is that if the people don't want this crap and one company builds a TV that doesn't do it, they'll take the lion's share of the market..
Or... perhaps you should develop your idea and come up with a squid box that requires minimal user interaction.. You could sell it as the "TV ad blocker" or some such thing.. All it takes is one great idea...