I never stated you said anything about those prices. The prices the utility pays here in most areas is wholesale, what they would pay to buy it from any other company, which makes them a profit. If I am making them profits in excess of the cost of the connection, which is really next to 0 since if something happens to the connection on my line I typically have to pay for it, then their should not be a charge for the connection.
1) are you sure it was operating at the time, or any time recently? Having worked for a power company and been on a coal plant the entire thing and the area around it is covered in coal ash
2) Sometimes the effects of pollution is not most felt so close to the plant but the surrounding areas.
The right to throw your first analogy works because it causes physical harm to you. You would have to prove that the noise is causing physical harm to you, and not just being an annoyance.
the problem with this logic is that what the utilities pay you for your excess is wholesale. This means they get to make a profit off your excess, and when you use things during off peak they are again making a profit off you, because they charge you retail. If they want to charge you a net metering fee they should be required to take your energy at higher than retail costs up till their is a nightly offset then anything extra is wholesale.
You named 3, out of a countless number of crimes. note I did not say it never happened, but the point was that it is so infrequent as to seem to never happen.
Obviously, if the company does something illegal the people behind it will be prosecuted, too
In what world are you living in... How often has a company that done something illegal ever had the people behind it get prosecuted. Small slap on the write fine for the company, then back to breaking the law.
A concentration camp is not, by default, used for genocide, it is used to concentrating a group of people to a particular area...
A spy agency is used to spy on other people.
Your analogy fails..
Spying on other people is not innately bad. There are bad people out there trying to do bad things, and most other countries have those same types of things.
I think this is just CYA. The government will set a minimum standard of security which the retailers will set as their default level and that way when a breach happens they can say, well we followed the government mandates, we should not be sued. This is not for the customers, it is for the retailers.
In reality they should be securing their systems to the best of their ability.
They added value. They added streaming, it just took a while for them to charge extra for it. they did not always offer streaming you know.
If comcast doubled their rates a few years after quadrupling the value of their offering people would moan, but it would be understandable that the rates were raised.
No he switched because they started acting like cable, but did not have the same price/Mbit that cable has.3Mbit/s from dsl costs 1/3 of 50Mbit/s from cable
I am pretty sure that having fast access to the internet is all google cares about in this market. Being able to change another company to manage it will not make them upset.
1) Well seeing how they were allready paid for by taxes given to them specifically to upgrade their network, which they just pocketed it. Or they could raise their rates, and not try to double dip in a way that customers will not fully notice.
2) And this is not related in any way.
3) again, you are rehashing one, not really a new point.
4) ISPs have historically always had settlement free peering, because without their customers demanding the traffic there would be no traffic, and that is the point of an ISP. You are confusing end point ISPs with transit ISPs. The new players, relativly, are tyring to make extra money by having both parts of that, and then charging transit prices for the endpoint which requested the data.
5)Transit providers, not end points, that allow them. But that does not matter we are talking about end points.
6) No they would not. Companies sometimes have to withhold releases or they would not have gotten the releases anyways. And raising rates when costs demand it is not a bad thing in general.
I pay for those bits with my broadband bill. Netflix pays on their end. If the ISP does not like the way that ISPs have operated, as opposed to transit operators, they should get out of the market, or raise rates for this consumers. We will see how the market treats them, as opposed to trying back door it.
Because the respublicans love to follow the constitution. You heard of the patriot act, which is anything but patriotic? You know, the act that gives the dems and repubs the authority to break the constitution, that was pasted by both parties?
Actually it is a combination of conservationism and liberalism. It is conservative positions with liberal politics. To claim that it is "socialism" is just you showing your bias.
That is the point. Using how a person response, aka the subjectiveness associated by the person, they can determine the category. If it was not subjective then there would have been zero effect from the image.
Most users of Linux dont run it only on the PC. In fact the vast majority use it for servers. Linux desktop use is not going to grow any time soon, because the ma and pa of the world just dont want to change their ways. Changing our ways to fit Mas and Pas does not really need to happen.
Slashdot Mirror
I never stated you said anything about those prices. The prices the utility pays here in most areas is wholesale, what they would pay to buy it from any other company, which makes them a profit. If I am making them profits in excess of the cost of the connection, which is really next to 0 since if something happens to the connection on my line I typically have to pay for it, then their should not be a charge for the connection.
So if you pulled down 100kwh but you put 200kwh on it they got 100kwh for free? That definitively should offset the cost.
2 things.
1) are you sure it was operating at the time, or any time recently? Having worked for a power company and been on a coal plant the entire thing and the area around it is covered in coal ash
2) Sometimes the effects of pollution is not most felt so close to the plant but the surrounding areas.
The right to throw your first analogy works because it causes physical harm to you. You would have to prove that the noise is causing physical harm to you, and not just being an annoyance.
the problem with this logic is that what the utilities pay you for your excess is wholesale. This means they get to make a profit off your excess, and when you use things during off peak they are again making a profit off you, because they charge you retail. If they want to charge you a net metering fee they should be required to take your energy at higher than retail costs up till their is a nightly offset then anything extra is wholesale.
You named 3, out of a countless number of crimes. note I did not say it never happened, but the point was that it is so infrequent as to seem to never happen.
independently of the people owning and/or running
Good job confirming his statement.
Obviously, if the company does something illegal the people behind it will be prosecuted, too
In what world are you living in... How often has a company that done something illegal ever had the people behind it get prosecuted. Small slap on the write fine for the company, then back to breaking the law.
The service is expected to allow users to save their programs for up to 28 days.
Sounds like they are competing with a dvr.
A concentration camp is not, by default, used for genocide, it is used to concentrating a group of people to a particular area...
A spy agency is used to spy on other people.
Your analogy fails..
Spying on other people is not innately bad. There are bad people out there trying to do bad things, and most other countries have those same types of things.
I think this is just CYA. The government will set a minimum standard of security which the retailers will set as their default level and that way when a breach happens they can say, well we followed the government mandates, we should not be sued. This is not for the customers, it is for the retailers.
In reality they should be securing their systems to the best of their ability.
Where did I say I expected this, or are you just into always assuming things?
I never said they did. So where exactly was I wrong?
They added value. They added streaming, it just took a while for them to charge extra for it. they did not always offer streaming you know.
If comcast doubled their rates a few years after quadrupling the value of their offering people would moan, but it would be understandable that the rates were raised.
No he switched because they started acting like cable, but did not have the same price/Mbit that cable has.3Mbit/s from dsl costs 1/3 of 50Mbit/s from cable
I am pretty sure that having fast access to the internet is all google cares about in this market. Being able to change another company to manage it will not make them upset.
1) Well seeing how they were allready paid for by taxes given to them specifically to upgrade their network, which they just pocketed it. Or they could raise their rates, and not try to double dip in a way that customers will not fully notice.
2) And this is not related in any way.
3) again, you are rehashing one, not really a new point.
4) ISPs have historically always had settlement free peering, because without their customers demanding the traffic there would be no traffic, and that is the point of an ISP. You are confusing end point ISPs with transit ISPs. The new players, relativly, are tyring to make extra money by having both parts of that, and then charging transit prices for the endpoint which requested the data.
5)Transit providers, not end points, that allow them. But that does not matter we are talking about end points.
6) No they would not. Companies sometimes have to withhold releases or they would not have gotten the releases anyways. And raising rates when costs demand it is not a bad thing in general.
So any time a company raises rates it is a slap in the face to their customers?
I pay for those bits with my broadband bill. Netflix pays on their end. If the ISP does not like the way that ISPs have operated, as opposed to transit operators, they should get out of the market, or raise rates for this consumers. We will see how the market treats them, as opposed to trying back door it.
Because the respublicans love to follow the constitution. You heard of the patriot act, which is anything but patriotic? You know, the act that gives the dems and repubs the authority to break the constitution, that was pasted by both parties?
You mean the list for all sermons that were being used for political purposes, and not for religious purposes?
Actually it is a combination of conservationism and liberalism. It is conservative positions with liberal politics. To claim that it is "socialism" is just you showing your bias.
That is the point. Using how a person response, aka the subjectiveness associated by the person, they can determine the category. If it was not subjective then there would have been zero effect from the image.
And by cleaning things up you mean a return to the great recession that they created 8 years ago?
And how many linux users are not power users who will have to see the complexity no matter what? I would say the vast majority.
Most users of Linux dont run it only on the PC. In fact the vast majority use it for servers. Linux desktop use is not going to grow any time soon, because the ma and pa of the world just dont want to change their ways. Changing our ways to fit Mas and Pas does not really need to happen.