It's not the magnitude of the cap. It's that bandwidth - which is a momentary capacity, not a "month cycle" capacity - is being charged that way.
This ain't electricity or water, where there is a certain central pool quantity to draw from. It's on or off.
Add to this the fact that NONE of these dishonest fuckers in these companies give you a good way to track "usage", and it gets worse.
Add in the fact that they are all doing this not to "manage slowdowns" but instead to try to push people back into buying "on demand TV" and "premium cable TV packages with rental DVR" and it's clear: this is not what they say it is. This is pure greed on their part.
I don't quite see the connection between a court case being having broad or narrow implications and how sympathetic or unsympathetic the defendant is.
"Easy" and "Hard" cases both have the same problem: they make for badly written, poorly thought out decisions.
In the case of "easy" cases, the "well he's obviously guilty so there" mentality leads to poorly considered, lazy jurisprudence with no thought for future consequences.
In the case of "hard" cases, the idea that the ruling applies to a very narrow set of circumstances leads only to legal finagling and nonsensical claims as to why "this new case" is "really the same" despite the fact that the circumstances are completely different.
Welcome to Wikipedia - common sense means nothing, and they actually have to have ESSAYS on what constitutes "Wikilawyering", "Gaming the system", and pretty much every tactic that is adopted by asshole "admins" and their followers but forbidden to everyone else (even if you're trying to counter their own bad-faith scumbaggery).
For those who are unclear: the WORST law, in terms of setting precedents to be relied on later, comes from cases in which a defendant is "obviously guilty of something" or just plain unsympathetic. The end result is a jury ruling on the emotional bounds of what they are presented, rather than on facts in the case, or in the appellate side, a bunch of judges making "fuck it we can see they are guilty why are you bothering us with this crap" rulings.
Ironically, the counterargument - hard cases make bad law - is also valid. Hard cases require very case-specific rulings and legal hair-splitting in order to arrive at the verdict or appellate review result, but then inevitably someone comes along and tries to apply them to completely different situations as precedent.
Someone with the "intent" to cause trouble in a custody case might have their ex followed, or try to get access to facebook info, or any other social media info.
Some stalking that person would do the precise same thing.
As far as the law goes, if you got your girlfriend pregnant, you have absolutely shit-all to say in the matter. It's entirely her choice.
You're willing to take the kid, go, raise your son/daughter, and willing to sign off that she never has to pay any child support or bother to see the kid if she doesn't want to? Too bad. She can abort anyways. You don't have any "parental rights" till the kid is actually born.
Counterpoint - you don't want kids, never did, she lied about being on the pill? She decides to proceed anyways and you're on the hook for 18+ years of child support.
Third point - family court is fucked up. You two have a falling-out later? Chances are the judge gives her sole custody, even if you have a solid job and house and she's a waitress who's been through 3 jobs in 2 years and now is shacking up with a pot-smoking loser. (Not joking, happened to one of my best friends). She decides to run off to two states away with the kids? Good luck even getting an out of state court to enforce a custody/visitation order - but oh boy will they ever go after you if you don't manage to keep up with the child support payments.
The law is terribly fucked up in many respects. Don't think it ends just at the abort/nonabort decision.
Currently, many sites can't even show a threaded discussion, or have no concept of moderation
The flipside is, Facebook's idea of "moderation" is pathetic.
Ever tried to look up your local state rep or congresscritter's facebook line? If it's a Republican, be prepared to see a wall full of nothing but hate speech and vitriol. Try to post a counterargument, and it'll vanish in about 5 seconds.
What's really funny is, the Retardicans want this to be "the model" for all discourse. That's why Scott the Koch Whore is trying so hard to kick the protesters out of the WI capital, up to and including coordinated astroturfing of the sort the Republicans and their Robber Baron masters have become so good at, and even actively considered plans involving sending in paid operatives to start fights or riots which he would then try to blame on the teachers.
If Facebook wanted to be solid for discussion, they need to take away "moderation powers" from the politicians.
The problem with disqus is that I have yet to see a "comment section" from them more than a day old that isn't completely chock-full of comment spam for Thank You For Writing Such An Article I Really Appreciated These Articles And Encourage You To Write More Signed Edward ((link))...
Indeed. The laws of physics, specifically concerning the creation and destruction of matter and energy, would indicate that in order to "radiate people" you'd have to have not only one hell of an energy source on your person, but something akin to an insanely cool energy-to-matter converter capable of creating atoms in the precise configuration as to generate a person.
Now, on the other hand, you may have meant "you can't just go around irradiating people", as in the verb irradiating, which means "exposing to radiation."
The connectors to the power supply are grounded, and there are ground pins all over the freaking place in the case. It's not as if the thing weren't pretty much grounded anyways. I've seen motherboards run inside cardboard boxes, on top of bubble wrap, packing foam, even on top of a pile of packing peanuts.
What I'm worried about is: what happens if you get one of the usual USA-type drivers from FedEx/UPS who kicks the shit out of your package? The box'll be halfway useless for making a PC anyways then.
Give it a week. They'll throw a few billion dollars at the Robberbaronicans and next thing you know, there'll be a "Personal Privacy for Corporations" clause slipped into the next budget bill.
It's n..... pidgin because after 200 years in this country they STILL can't speak English.
Actually, it's worse than that. You see, the black leaders of yesteryear DID speak english very well. And they encouraged their children, and everyone else of their race, to do the same. Even in the 1980s and 1990s you had leaders like Bill Cosby and Whoopi Goldberg who knew that speaking properly and becoming educated were critical to the success of black children.
But you also have people like the gang leaders, Louis Farrakhan, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton - the race and poverty pimps who thrive on deliberately keeping blacks uneducated and afraid of "the man" and ensuring that they will vote in whatever way Jesse/Al tell them to vote. The people who insist on dressing up racial separatism as "keeping it real."
It's sad. George Washington Carver, Martin Luther King Jr, Langston Hughes, Charles Hamilton Houston, Harry Belafonte, Carter G. Woodson, Mary Bethune, Paul Robeson, James Baldwin, Adam Powell Jr, Booker T. Washington, Frederick Douglass, Thurgood Marshall, W.E.B. Dubois - they would all be appalled beyond measure at the behavior of those who behave like this.
This is why corporate "personhood", the product of nine senile delinquents in black robes, is such a fucking stupid idea.
Corporations aren't people. They may have people as employees or stockholders, but in the end you cannot imprison a corporation. You cannot "fine" a corporation in any sense that matters since those at the top will just fuck over the workers to make up the profit. You cannot expect moral behavior out of a corporation because the fatass pillage-o-crats at the top make their decisions secure in the knowledge that with an army of lawyers, a vault of money, and the "corporate shield" on their side, they cannot be imprisoned or reasonably made to suffer for their actions.
By definition, the work they do is "political stuff."
This is an attempt at union suppression, the same as if that dickfaced Koch-brother stooge Scott Walker tried to ban state employees from discussing union issues in the hallway.
Better yet, why not just rip the blu-ray and put it on a network media center? Skip the middle man, and not have to bother wondering where your 3-year-old hid the disk or worry that he scratched it up since you can then put the disc away in a very safe, secure place.
Not quite. Orb, and other varieties of streaming server apps, works great until you either want to switch language tracks or need to turn on subtitles/closed captioning.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not the magnitude of the cap. It's that bandwidth - which is a momentary capacity, not a "month cycle" capacity - is being charged that way.
This ain't electricity or water, where there is a certain central pool quantity to draw from. It's on or off.
Add to this the fact that NONE of these dishonest fuckers in these companies give you a good way to track "usage", and it gets worse.
Add in the fact that they are all doing this not to "manage slowdowns" but instead to try to push people back into buying "on demand TV" and "premium cable TV packages with rental DVR" and it's clear: this is not what they say it is. This is pure greed on their part.
the consumer gets screwed.
"Caps" are the worst way of doing business, designed to cover the fact that they engaged in blatant false advertising.
I don't quite see the connection between a court case being having broad or narrow implications and how sympathetic or unsympathetic the defendant is.
"Easy" and "Hard" cases both have the same problem: they make for badly written, poorly thought out decisions.
In the case of "easy" cases, the "well he's obviously guilty so there" mentality leads to poorly considered, lazy jurisprudence with no thought for future consequences.
In the case of "hard" cases, the idea that the ruling applies to a very narrow set of circumstances leads only to legal finagling and nonsensical claims as to why "this new case" is "really the same" despite the fact that the circumstances are completely different.
Welcome to Wikipedia - common sense means nothing, and they actually have to have ESSAYS on what constitutes "Wikilawyering", "Gaming the system", and pretty much every tactic that is adopted by asshole "admins" and their followers but forbidden to everyone else (even if you're trying to counter their own bad-faith scumbaggery).
Remember - you can learn a lot from what former admins write regarding how Wikipedia really works.
The phrase you are looking for is "easy cases make bad law.
For those who are unclear: the WORST law, in terms of setting precedents to be relied on later, comes from cases in which a defendant is "obviously guilty of something" or just plain unsympathetic. The end result is a jury ruling on the emotional bounds of what they are presented, rather than on facts in the case, or in the appellate side, a bunch of judges making "fuck it we can see they are guilty why are you bothering us with this crap" rulings.
Ironically, the counterargument - hard cases make bad law - is also valid. Hard cases require very case-specific rulings and legal hair-splitting in order to arrive at the verdict or appellate review result, but then inevitably someone comes along and tries to apply them to completely different situations as precedent.
Bullshit.
Someone with the "intent" to cause trouble in a custody case might have their ex followed, or try to get access to facebook info, or any other social media info.
Some stalking that person would do the precise same thing.
In tonight's news: EA are a bunch of fucking dickheads.
In other news: Water is wet. Ice is cold.
And pray you don't have dandruff.
Well, there's always the parable of the loaves and the fishes.
We could call it "Jesusing" or "Jesusery" instead of "Piracy."
If nothing else, it'd get the fundie xtians' panties in a wad.
That's just YOUR kink.
Why do they have to be naked?
Sex is perfectly possible while (mostly) clothed.
As far as the law goes, if you got your girlfriend pregnant, you have absolutely shit-all to say in the matter. It's entirely her choice.
You're willing to take the kid, go, raise your son/daughter, and willing to sign off that she never has to pay any child support or bother to see the kid if she doesn't want to? Too bad. She can abort anyways. You don't have any "parental rights" till the kid is actually born.
Counterpoint - you don't want kids, never did, she lied about being on the pill? She decides to proceed anyways and you're on the hook for 18+ years of child support.
Third point - family court is fucked up. You two have a falling-out later? Chances are the judge gives her sole custody, even if you have a solid job and house and she's a waitress who's been through 3 jobs in 2 years and now is shacking up with a pot-smoking loser. (Not joking, happened to one of my best friends). She decides to run off to two states away with the kids? Good luck even getting an out of state court to enforce a custody/visitation order - but oh boy will they ever go after you if you don't manage to keep up with the child support payments.
The law is terribly fucked up in many respects. Don't think it ends just at the abort/nonabort decision.
Currently, many sites can't even show a threaded discussion, or have no concept of moderation
The flipside is, Facebook's idea of "moderation" is pathetic.
Ever tried to look up your local state rep or congresscritter's facebook line? If it's a Republican, be prepared to see a wall full of nothing but hate speech and vitriol. Try to post a counterargument, and it'll vanish in about 5 seconds.
What's really funny is, the Retardicans want this to be "the model" for all discourse. That's why Scott the Koch Whore is trying so hard to kick the protesters out of the WI capital, up to and including coordinated astroturfing of the sort the Republicans and their Robber Baron masters have become so good at, and even actively considered plans involving sending in paid operatives to start fights or riots which he would then try to blame on the teachers.
If Facebook wanted to be solid for discussion, they need to take away "moderation powers" from the politicians.
The problem with disqus is that I have yet to see a "comment section" from them more than a day old that isn't completely chock-full of comment spam for Thank You For Writing Such An Article I Really Appreciated These Articles And Encourage You To Write More Signed Edward ((link))...
You can't just go around radiating people.
Indeed. The laws of physics, specifically concerning the creation and destruction of matter and energy, would indicate that in order to "radiate people" you'd have to have not only one hell of an energy source on your person, but something akin to an insanely cool energy-to-matter converter capable of creating atoms in the precise configuration as to generate a person.
Now, on the other hand, you may have meant "you can't just go around irradiating people", as in the verb irradiating, which means "exposing to radiation."
The connectors to the power supply are grounded, and there are ground pins all over the freaking place in the case. It's not as if the thing weren't pretty much grounded anyways. I've seen motherboards run inside cardboard boxes, on top of bubble wrap, packing foam, even on top of a pile of packing peanuts.
What I'm worried about is: what happens if you get one of the usual USA-type drivers from FedEx/UPS who kicks the shit out of your package? The box'll be halfway useless for making a PC anyways then.
Give it a week. They'll throw a few billion dollars at the Robberbaronicans and next thing you know, there'll be a "Personal Privacy for Corporations" clause slipped into the next budget bill.
It's n..... pidgin because after 200 years in this country they STILL can't speak English.
Actually, it's worse than that. You see, the black leaders of yesteryear DID speak english very well. And they encouraged their children, and everyone else of their race, to do the same. Even in the 1980s and 1990s you had leaders like Bill Cosby and Whoopi Goldberg who knew that speaking properly and becoming educated were critical to the success of black children.
But you also have people like the gang leaders, Louis Farrakhan, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton - the race and poverty pimps who thrive on deliberately keeping blacks uneducated and afraid of "the man" and ensuring that they will vote in whatever way Jesse/Al tell them to vote. The people who insist on dressing up racial separatism as "keeping it real."
It's sad. George Washington Carver, Martin Luther King Jr, Langston Hughes, Charles Hamilton Houston, Harry Belafonte, Carter G. Woodson, Mary Bethune, Paul Robeson, James Baldwin, Adam Powell Jr, Booker T. Washington, Frederick Douglass, Thurgood Marshall, W.E.B. Dubois - they would all be appalled beyond measure at the behavior of those who behave like this.
If the music was worth buying, people would buy it.
As long as most of what they are trying to sell is disneyfied overproduced crap or bieberfied overproduced crap, we don't want it.
This is why corporate "personhood", the product of nine senile delinquents in black robes, is such a fucking stupid idea.
Corporations aren't people. They may have people as employees or stockholders, but in the end you cannot imprison a corporation. You cannot "fine" a corporation in any sense that matters since those at the top will just fuck over the workers to make up the profit. You cannot expect moral behavior out of a corporation because the fatass pillage-o-crats at the top make their decisions secure in the knowledge that with an army of lawyers, a vault of money, and the "corporate shield" on their side, they cannot be imprisoned or reasonably made to suffer for their actions.
They work in the state capital.
By definition, the work they do is "political stuff."
This is an attempt at union suppression, the same as if that dickfaced Koch-brother stooge Scott Walker tried to ban state employees from discussing union issues in the hallway.
Just change the headline to "Fascist dick joins group of fascist dicks" and be done with it.
Better yet, why not just rip the blu-ray and put it on a network media center? Skip the middle man, and not have to bother wondering where your 3-year-old hid the disk or worry that he scratched it up since you can then put the disc away in a very safe, secure place.
Tablets are currently closed systems for the most part.
Give me an open system and we'll talk.
Not quite. Orb, and other varieties of streaming server apps, works great until you either want to switch language tracks or need to turn on subtitles/closed captioning.