You'll have to start censoring for everyone....and I have a pretty damn good feeling plenty of people here...who already don't give a fuck about freedom of expression; would be more than willing to put the screws to these companies.
It's better to maintain your integrity, stand behind your product, and tell China to go fuck itself.
But the problem is money talks...and it's become more and more clear that game publishers don't really give two shits about what gamers want...they just want money.
This is the end of the gaming industry. In a few years everyone will be demanding censorship and all we'll be able to do is look back at the great games we once had.
"always broadcast a signal". They only do that when within the low-frequency radio signal generated by the car. They work much like RFID if you don't press a button on it. This is also really only usable on vehicles that don't use the standard "press a button to do something" fob. My 2011 Hyundai uses a standard fob like this; the 2018 Yukon XL I rented used the more modern type since it was a push-start.
Because at some point her wireless provider will either add a super high data cap or be able to throttle video traffic.
Relying on the internet when the providers are hell-bent on acting like an unregulated monopoly is a problem. People like you just rolling over and accepting it is a problem.
Yup. With the ISP's effectively winning the war to do whatever they want...you'll soon be forced to subscribe to TV from your monopoly or suffer consequences.
I really miss when there were consumer protection laws and things in place to prevent bullshit like this from happening. I'd rather pay taxes than pay unregulated extortion rates to a private corporation.
I stopped using it for anything other than a VPN transport years ago. Connected one day...everything took *forever* to load...half the DNS not resolving. Connected to a VPN and it was snappy as anything.
But NOVA can't handle it. They can barely handle the number of people now. If they're looking at Crystal City....that's going to cause havoc on Alexandria. The article says it's "served by a major highways"...no..it's not. It's pretty much "local" roads because the one highway through there is pretty much a 24/7 toll road.
I think part of the solution is that patents shouldn't be transferable...at all...ever. The problem is these guys just buy up "useless" patents...usually cheap...and just sue like crazy. They never actually contributed *anything* to the development of the technology...not to mention the original guys who came up with it probably never got compensated as they were probably employees and the patent went to the company.
If you prohibit patents from changing hands to entities that have nothing to do with them...then stuff like this for the most part will stop. You won't have guys buying a bankrupt company's IP at auction and then just suing everyone because "they own the patent".
If the company goes under...then the patent should expire. Letting assholes buy it for a couple bucks at a liquidation and then start suing everyone isn't what the patent system was designed for.
I have to wonder if there were that many issues...or if those people yelled in to an echo chamber that just resonated out this same thing.
I installed 1809 on the 4th and didn't have much data in any user folders since I had reinstalled to a new SSD 5 days prior. I backed up what I did have since reports said it seemed to happen if you'd "done stuff" to your user directories...like move them. I put mine on an external so I wouldn't fill the SSD with garbage. I suffered no data loss.
What....you leave your laptop in the room like an idiot? Last time I stayed at a hotel I either locked my electronics (like my laptop) in the in-room safe or I put them in my car when I left the room. I never left my laptop unattended.
Refuse to regulate something while simultaneously preventing others from doing so. The FCC gave up it's right to regulate...therefore it has no business telling others they can't. The only way to stop others from regulating it is to have actual rules.
This sadly is only going to get worse as time goes on. As more and more broadcasters go under and ownership of these stations gets consolidated; the amount of money being asked goes up. I can't tell you how many times as a dish subscriber I couldn't watch ABC because the local affiliates wanted some amount of money that was considered unjust.
Of course the DTV switchover really fucked a lot of people and made the situation even better for affiliates. Anyone intelligent knew that 8VSB was going to be a horrible choice for modulation; granted OFDM wasn't ready when they developed the standard...this is what happens when you develop a standard and set it in stone YEARS before it's even adopted. IIRC ATSC was "adopted" in 1995; test transmissions didn't start till 1996; I don't think the first ATSC HDTV tuners hit the market till 1999. By 1999 OFDM technology was easily available...in fact they were still in the testing phase when everyone else started looking at it. But there was ZERO incentive to change. Broadcasters wanted this inferior system. They knew damn well a large portion of viewers in some areas would lose all programming via antenna....and this made them happy. It meant they would finally be able to start demanding more money as more and more people became dependant on this for keeping up with the local news and network programming.
The original idea was to keep out-of-market channels off cable systems; prior to this most of what a cable system could bank on was being able to pull in "out of market" television channels; in fact that was the original idea behind cable. CATV doesn't stand for CAble TV; but for Community Antenna TeleVision. You live in a valley? No one can get TV? Got a lot of money? Then you just put a tower up on the ridge, tune to all the TV channels coming off the air, run distribution to people, charge them a few bucks for it. Much in the same way a lot of radio stations were owned by radio manfacturers or radio dealers.....the very first "cable" system was owned by a TV dealer looking for a way to sell TV's in a community that had lousy reception.
The sad part is if your local affilate gets dropped from your provider due to contract issues; current regulations prohibit the provider from piping in someone else. Hell, back before DBS started offering locals I was required to get waivers from the local channels due to the fact I couldnt' get them OTA. They all refused. To this day I still don't watch local news or network TV because...I went so many years not being able to why start now?
This is why government is a damn joke and the people need to take the power back from the fucking morons they gave it to in the first place.
If we can't have gun control becuase "the constitution says the right to own guns (arms technically) shall not be infringed"...then law enforcement should have to actually do a little work and deal with encryption since the constitution doesn't make exceptions for our right to privacy.
Otherwise your government is just a bunch of oppressive asshates; illegtimate; and need to be overthrown.
One thing I've noticed about Google...especially lately...is they are adding some historical names to areas. A prime example is a spot out in California I go to which doesn't really have a mailing address, but Google assigns it location name. That name is based off a long-defunct stop on a railroad on a long defunct rail line.
I've seen this locally too. I've noticed some really old names for areas that I've only seen on maps made before the 1920s. I have to wonder if Google is acquiring really old maps in whatever it's licensing and someone had the idea to toss these names in here. There's one place near me that shows up as "[something] Post Office" when the post office has been gone for well over 100 years. Most people have no clue why this name is showing up till I unroll an antique map and show them.
I know where I live..most neighborhoods "advertise" somehow...they'll have nice name markers. IT came as a lot of neighbors' surprise when they started seeing the name of a place they'd never heard of. "Check your tax maps; that entire area was organized as a sub-division in the 70s before it was built and the name is probably on your deed." Pretty much everyone that lives back there has moved in within the last 20 years and actually never bothered looking over the details of their deeds to see "[redacted] Mills Lot [whatever]" on there.
As someone who is fascinated with maps, it makes perfect sense to me.
The Trump administration will say this report is fake news and claim, fasely, that America has the best broadband.
Touch-Once-Make-Ready will get put in to place at a national level and we soon find "the big boys" interfering with local competition by "damaging" lines.
I had summer jobs...I left those because summer ended.
As an adult I've left my current job twice. Once because I got tired of the boss' attitude toward working me 6 days a week and not paying me for it. I went back after six months when I was having problems and he realized how badly I screwed up. Went back with a bit of a raise. The second time was because I got hurt on the job; found out the boss wasn't legally required to have insurance or workman's comp...so he didn't. I got to deal with a spinal injury with absolutely no ability to work and zero income. I only went back because the debt was piling up and people were getting upset. At least now he only works me what he's willing to pay.
The third and final reason I'll be leaving this job in about a year, according to my plan, is I'm just getting out of this god-forsaken expensive area and going to start over somewhere else. Jobs for what I do aren't common and they don't pay well; and combined with the high price of living means anything less than 70k/year isn't livable. I know the place I want to go has more affordable rent and probably more job options related to what I do that'll pay more.
Sprint and TMO will merge, reduce the number of carriers; but probably be able to give Verizon a run for the money.
Sprint and TMO don't merge. Sprint fails under it's massive debt. The licenses and IP go to auction for pennies on the dollar.
Either way Sprint isn't going to survive. They never recovered from the Nextel acquisition and they're hemorrhaging customers due to the fact they're still behind on LTE.
Either way Sprint isn't going to make it; the numbers of carriers will be reduced to three. It's just a question of WHO is going to wind up with it. TMO from a merger, or Verizon.
I don't see TMO or AT&T being able to compete with Verizon at an auction.
Yes, let's make our government-subsizied and owned monopoly add on additional costs when they don't want to subsidize it in the first place.
Let's not even talk about the fact Amtrak is one of the more expensive options for long distance travel. Using my upcoming vacation as an example; Amtrak doesn't offer actual train service to Las Vegas...so you have to take the train to L.A. and then spend almost 7 hours on a bus. This is $280 each way and a travel time of 72 hours each way! Meanwhile, $180 gets me on a flight to Las Vegas that has a total travel time (including short layover/plane switch) of just the Amtrak bus segment! Mind you, this is also for just a coach seat on Amtrak; so have fun spending 18 hours riding to Chicago and then 42 hours to LA...in a coach seat.
Amtrak isn't attracting new customers because no one wants to pay that much more for a "lower" level of service; it has nothing to do with the availability of ticket agents. I really have to question doing something for "disadvantaged populations" that's typically a more expensive option too. If someone is that bad off, they're likely to want to really save the pennies and won't consider Amtrak at $300 if they can ride a bus for less money. Greyhound directly to Vegas is about $208 and takes about 60 hours. If I'm "disadvantaged", I'm probably saving the $78 and taking Greyhound and actually get there faster.
The lack of a credit card or other banking isn't what it used to be either. You can get reloadable cards now...they've been a thing for years. There's also the thing of you can still pay cash at the ticket counters of most airlines. You can even usually call ahead to reserve and they'll give you 24 hours to show up and pay. It might cost a little bit more...and you might have some extra screening. But if you don't want that, you can just go back and pay more for the slower, less comfortable option.
There are a few legitimate reasons...but these can be overcome other ways. Why not let a third-party sell the tickets? Go to your local Western Union outlet and purchase them; sell them at the post office; visit a local travel agent and pay them cash to get your tickets.
This just seems like a very shallow act by a politician trying to make it seem like he's "helped" people. He's done something for a few people that we'll all have to pay for. It also seems like a very lazy solution for people who can't be bothered to actually think.
Have a system of checks in place. Do something to the system to make them not work by breaking them or hiring an employee who is not qualified. Use as an example as to why background checks don't work and why we need to get rid of them.
This is basically how the GOP operates. Like all the laws they used to block municipal broadband...they cite an example of my town's briefly-municipal system as a "failure that cost the taxpayers millions."
Except the system was highly flawed, violated FCC rules, the DOJ had to tell the FCC to enforce it's own rules on the subject, the incumbent privatized ISP responded by actually expanding it's coverage, people jumped ship to a better system, city took over the system only to shut it down cleanly. It was broadband over power line...it was a doomed system...but to the average profit-loving Republican...it's example number one of why "we need to let the private industry run broadband".
This whole thing is a joke. The gun lobby didn't want the system to work.
It's a bit more complicated than that. Satellite internet would probably be allowed since those are technically licensed radiators..or at the very least, are type-accepted by the FCC and have passed a stricter set of tests for spurious emissions/leakage. Most of your radiation is going to be focused in a beam upwards. I mean..it can cause problems, but most of those could be mitigated. Most of the tightest restrictions are in a pretty small radius around the facilities. It mostly means a broadcaster can't find the tallest peak and blast a super powerful signal and that cell phone carriers have to do a whole lot more coordination before putting up sites.
Now now...we can't go around suing people for doing the job they were trained and told to do. The fact is SWAT is there to do one job, neutralize a threat. They're usually not trained to perceive a threat...that's someone else's job. They're just the guys called in to neutralize it.
Slashdot Mirror
You'll have to start censoring for everyone....and I have a pretty damn good feeling plenty of people here...who already don't give a fuck about freedom of expression; would be more than willing to put the screws to these companies.
It's better to maintain your integrity, stand behind your product, and tell China to go fuck itself.
But the problem is money talks...and it's become more and more clear that game publishers don't really give two shits about what gamers want...they just want money.
This is the end of the gaming industry. In a few years everyone will be demanding censorship and all we'll be able to do is look back at the great games we once had.
"always broadcast a signal". They only do that when within the low-frequency radio signal generated by the car. They work much like RFID if you don't press a button on it. This is also really only usable on vehicles that don't use the standard "press a button to do something" fob. My 2011 Hyundai uses a standard fob like this; the 2018 Yukon XL I rented used the more modern type since it was a push-start.
Any kind of advertising is basically a rape of the eyes and ears. There *is* no non-disruptive advertising.
Because at some point her wireless provider will either add a super high data cap or be able to throttle video traffic.
Relying on the internet when the providers are hell-bent on acting like an unregulated monopoly is a problem. People like you just rolling over and accepting it is a problem.
Yup. With the ISP's effectively winning the war to do whatever they want...you'll soon be forced to subscribe to TV from your monopoly or suffer consequences.
I really miss when there were consumer protection laws and things in place to prevent bullshit like this from happening. I'd rather pay taxes than pay unregulated extortion rates to a private corporation.
I stopped using it for anything other than a VPN transport years ago. Connected one day...everything took *forever* to load...half the DNS not resolving. Connected to a VPN and it was snappy as anything.
But NOVA can't handle it. They can barely handle the number of people now. If they're looking at Crystal City....that's going to cause havoc on Alexandria. The article says it's "served by a major highways"...no..it's not. It's pretty much "local" roads because the one highway through there is pretty much a 24/7 toll road.
I think part of the solution is that patents shouldn't be transferable...at all...ever. The problem is these guys just buy up "useless" patents...usually cheap...and just sue like crazy. They never actually contributed *anything* to the development of the technology...not to mention the original guys who came up with it probably never got compensated as they were probably employees and the patent went to the company.
If you prohibit patents from changing hands to entities that have nothing to do with them...then stuff like this for the most part will stop. You won't have guys buying a bankrupt company's IP at auction and then just suing everyone because "they own the patent".
If the company goes under...then the patent should expire. Letting assholes buy it for a couple bucks at a liquidation and then start suing everyone isn't what the patent system was designed for.
So........ municipal broadband threatens free speech? We have a thing to prevent that kind of thing.......
THE FIRST ADMENDMENT!!!!!!!!!!
What kind of fucking morons do these ass clowns think we are? Is that the intelligence level they expect to deal with?
I have to wonder if there were that many issues...or if those people yelled in to an echo chamber that just resonated out this same thing.
I installed 1809 on the 4th and didn't have much data in any user folders since I had reinstalled to a new SSD 5 days prior. I backed up what I did have since reports said it seemed to happen if you'd "done stuff" to your user directories...like move them. I put mine on an external so I wouldn't fill the SSD with garbage. I suffered no data loss.
Then again...I also don't log-in or use OneDrive.
What....you leave your laptop in the room like an idiot? Last time I stayed at a hotel I either locked my electronics (like my laptop) in the in-room safe or I put them in my car when I left the room. I never left my laptop unattended.
Refuse to regulate something while simultaneously preventing others from doing so. The FCC gave up it's right to regulate...therefore it has no business telling others they can't. The only way to stop others from regulating it is to have actual rules.
This sadly is only going to get worse as time goes on. As more and more broadcasters go under and ownership of these stations gets consolidated; the amount of money being asked goes up. I can't tell you how many times as a dish subscriber I couldn't watch ABC because the local affiliates wanted some amount of money that was considered unjust.
Of course the DTV switchover really fucked a lot of people and made the situation even better for affiliates. Anyone intelligent knew that 8VSB was going to be a horrible choice for modulation; granted OFDM wasn't ready when they developed the standard...this is what happens when you develop a standard and set it in stone YEARS before it's even adopted. IIRC ATSC was "adopted" in 1995; test transmissions didn't start till 1996; I don't think the first ATSC HDTV tuners hit the market till 1999. By 1999 OFDM technology was easily available...in fact they were still in the testing phase when everyone else started looking at it. But there was ZERO incentive to change. Broadcasters wanted this inferior system. They knew damn well a large portion of viewers in some areas would lose all programming via antenna....and this made them happy. It meant they would finally be able to start demanding more money as more and more people became dependant on this for keeping up with the local news and network programming.
The original idea was to keep out-of-market channels off cable systems; prior to this most of what a cable system could bank on was being able to pull in "out of market" television channels; in fact that was the original idea behind cable. CATV doesn't stand for CAble TV; but for Community Antenna TeleVision. You live in a valley? No one can get TV? Got a lot of money? Then you just put a tower up on the ridge, tune to all the TV channels coming off the air, run distribution to people, charge them a few bucks for it. Much in the same way a lot of radio stations were owned by radio manfacturers or radio dealers.....the very first "cable" system was owned by a TV dealer looking for a way to sell TV's in a community that had lousy reception.
The sad part is if your local affilate gets dropped from your provider due to contract issues; current regulations prohibit the provider from piping in someone else. Hell, back before DBS started offering locals I was required to get waivers from the local channels due to the fact I couldnt' get them OTA. They all refused. To this day I still don't watch local news or network TV because...I went so many years not being able to why start now?
This is why government is a damn joke and the people need to take the power back from the fucking morons they gave it to in the first place.
If we can't have gun control becuase "the constitution says the right to own guns (arms technically) shall not be infringed"...then law enforcement should have to actually do a little work and deal with encryption since the constitution doesn't make exceptions for our right to privacy.
Otherwise your government is just a bunch of oppressive asshates; illegtimate; and need to be overthrown.
One thing I've noticed about Google...especially lately...is they are adding some historical names to areas. A prime example is a spot out in California I go to which doesn't really have a mailing address, but Google assigns it location name. That name is based off a long-defunct stop on a railroad on a long defunct rail line.
I've seen this locally too. I've noticed some really old names for areas that I've only seen on maps made before the 1920s. I have to wonder if Google is acquiring really old maps in whatever it's licensing and someone had the idea to toss these names in here. There's one place near me that shows up as "[something] Post Office" when the post office has been gone for well over 100 years. Most people have no clue why this name is showing up till I unroll an antique map and show them.
I know where I live..most neighborhoods "advertise" somehow...they'll have nice name markers. IT came as a lot of neighbors' surprise when they started seeing the name of a place they'd never heard of. "Check your tax maps; that entire area was organized as a sub-division in the 70s before it was built and the name is probably on your deed." Pretty much everyone that lives back there has moved in within the last 20 years and actually never bothered looking over the details of their deeds to see "[redacted] Mills Lot [whatever]" on there.
As someone who is fascinated with maps, it makes perfect sense to me.
The Trump administration will say this report is fake news and claim, fasely, that America has the best broadband.
Touch-Once-Make-Ready will get put in to place at a national level and we soon find "the big boys" interfering with local competition by "damaging" lines.
Either way we're screwed.
I had summer jobs...I left those because summer ended.
As an adult I've left my current job twice. Once because I got tired of the boss' attitude toward working me 6 days a week and not paying me for it. I went back after six months when I was having problems and he realized how badly I screwed up. Went back with a bit of a raise. The second time was because I got hurt on the job; found out the boss wasn't legally required to have insurance or workman's comp...so he didn't. I got to deal with a spinal injury with absolutely no ability to work and zero income. I only went back because the debt was piling up and people were getting upset. At least now he only works me what he's willing to pay.
The third and final reason I'll be leaving this job in about a year, according to my plan, is I'm just getting out of this god-forsaken expensive area and going to start over somewhere else. Jobs for what I do aren't common and they don't pay well; and combined with the high price of living means anything less than 70k/year isn't livable. I know the place I want to go has more affordable rent and probably more job options related to what I do that'll pay more.
Sprint and TMO will merge, reduce the number of carriers; but probably be able to give Verizon a run for the money.
Sprint and TMO don't merge. Sprint fails under it's massive debt. The licenses and IP go to auction for pennies on the dollar.
Either way Sprint isn't going to survive. They never recovered from the Nextel acquisition and they're hemorrhaging customers due to the fact they're still behind on LTE.
Either way Sprint isn't going to make it; the numbers of carriers will be reduced to three. It's just a question of WHO is going to wind up with it. TMO from a merger, or Verizon.
I don't see TMO or AT&T being able to compete with Verizon at an auction.
GTFO.
Considering censorship is just what this administration wants you'd think they'd embrace this with open arms.
Yes, let's make our government-subsizied and owned monopoly add on additional costs when they don't want to subsidize it in the first place.
Let's not even talk about the fact Amtrak is one of the more expensive options for long distance travel. Using my upcoming vacation as an example; Amtrak doesn't offer actual train service to Las Vegas...so you have to take the train to L.A. and then spend almost 7 hours on a bus. This is $280 each way and a travel time of 72 hours each way! Meanwhile, $180 gets me on a flight to Las Vegas that has a total travel time (including short layover/plane switch) of just the Amtrak bus segment! Mind you, this is also for just a coach seat on Amtrak; so have fun spending 18 hours riding to Chicago and then 42 hours to LA...in a coach seat.
Amtrak isn't attracting new customers because no one wants to pay that much more for a "lower" level of service; it has nothing to do with the availability of ticket agents. I really have to question doing something for "disadvantaged populations" that's typically a more expensive option too. If someone is that bad off, they're likely to want to really save the pennies and won't consider Amtrak at $300 if they can ride a bus for less money. Greyhound directly to Vegas is about $208 and takes about 60 hours. If I'm "disadvantaged", I'm probably saving the $78 and taking Greyhound and actually get there faster.
The lack of a credit card or other banking isn't what it used to be either. You can get reloadable cards now...they've been a thing for years. There's also the thing of you can still pay cash at the ticket counters of most airlines. You can even usually call ahead to reserve and they'll give you 24 hours to show up and pay. It might cost a little bit more...and you might have some extra screening. But if you don't want that, you can just go back and pay more for the slower, less comfortable option.
There are a few legitimate reasons...but these can be overcome other ways. Why not let a third-party sell the tickets? Go to your local Western Union outlet and purchase them; sell them at the post office; visit a local travel agent and pay them cash to get your tickets.
This just seems like a very shallow act by a politician trying to make it seem like he's "helped" people. He's done something for a few people that we'll all have to pay for. It also seems like a very lazy solution for people who can't be bothered to actually think.
Have a system of checks in place. Do something to the system to make them not work by breaking them or hiring an employee who is not qualified. Use as an example as to why background checks don't work and why we need to get rid of them.
This is basically how the GOP operates. Like all the laws they used to block municipal broadband...they cite an example of my town's briefly-municipal system as a "failure that cost the taxpayers millions."
Except the system was highly flawed, violated FCC rules, the DOJ had to tell the FCC to enforce it's own rules on the subject, the incumbent privatized ISP responded by actually expanding it's coverage, people jumped ship to a better system, city took over the system only to shut it down cleanly. It was broadband over power line...it was a doomed system...but to the average profit-loving Republican...it's example number one of why "we need to let the private industry run broadband".
This whole thing is a joke. The gun lobby didn't want the system to work.
It's a bit more complicated than that. Satellite internet would probably be allowed since those are technically licensed radiators..or at the very least, are type-accepted by the FCC and have passed a stricter set of tests for spurious emissions/leakage. Most of your radiation is going to be focused in a beam upwards. I mean..it can cause problems, but most of those could be mitigated. Most of the tightest restrictions are in a pretty small radius around the facilities. It mostly means a broadcaster can't find the tallest peak and blast a super powerful signal and that cell phone carriers have to do a whole lot more coordination before putting up sites.
Yes. And as owner of your ISP...I'll be sure to block Fox News and Trump's Twitter feed because nothing says I can't.
Now now...we can't go around suing people for doing the job they were trained and told to do. The fact is SWAT is there to do one job, neutralize a threat. They're usually not trained to perceive a threat...that's someone else's job. They're just the guys called in to neutralize it.