Then comcast should get out of the market. If it does not want me to use my internet how they claim I can use my internet then they should not be provideing me internet.
How does netflix have a free ride? The pay for every bit of bandwidth they use, and I pay for ever bit I use watching them. Now explain to me where, when 2 parties are already paying for the sum of the bandwidth, is there a free ride.
Its rather funny to see people who think this kinda thing will save them money. At the end of the day it will cost you more money. Less competition, more double dipping.
I just wish I knew their criteria. I got tired of waiting so I moved 20minutes outside of Raleigh in Garner, there is a lot of houses, I have 50m cable, but will that get fiber if it comes to Raleigh.
Do we have an issue with the Supreme Court? The agency has limited terms, and have to be appointed, other than that they are supposed to be free of the authority to prevent people from swaying their job, so they can remain impartial...
Having no laws against something is not the same thing as allowing it. There are regulations, Comcast is required to have net neutrality for x years due to merger and the like.
In what way? There is not a free market in broadband because the incumbents interfere, meaning that it cannot be solved without government interference.
From the washington post story you should have linked too, as that link was just a link to it,http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/02/12/is-u-s-press-freedom-really-plummeting-not-if-you-look-at-the-data/?tid=pm_world_pop :
To be clear, the Reporters Without Borders methodology is not arbitrary
Racist bigots (for affiliating with "Tea Party Extremists" when they only want a balanced budget and reasonable cuts to defense and wasteful spending).
Your quote in there makes it seem like the tea part is not extreme, but they are, very extreme....
Gun zealots when they stand up for their right to bear arm
Gun zealots are the people who support things like stand your ground, or castle laws that put human life behind property
Selfish jerks for wanting wasteful social spending cuts on the poor that seems to be fine with using SNAP funds for booze, etc. (Yes, they're a minority, but a substantial one.)
And who in the process hurt more non abusers of the system than abusers, or waste even more money (FL drug testing scheme).
Intolerant bigots for wanting to worship who or what they may - and want laws reflecting their beliefs (as long as they don't conflict with basic civil rights - and I don't mean the ever expansion of civil rights to include every minority created by individuals for their own benefit.)
There is never a good middle ground when you allow people to force their beliefs on others, and most dont care if they conflict with civil rights (gay marriage, abortion, suicide and drugs) as long as they get what they want...
Ignorant racists for questioning this administration.
Most of the time it is for something other than just questioning, unless it was just questioning because he is black
Ignorant terrorist supporters for questioning the last administration.
Cant really think of this one.. To be honest I have never heard it directly
The groups described above are generally either directly assaulted by (or blatantly marketed to) elements in the press because they think for themselves - and whether they're right or wrong, they're - well - dangerous...
Most of these people dont think for themselves, in general, they are mostly herd mentalities
So again you wanna keep everyone else down because you are ok, and cannot clearly think outside your box. There are other, worse things that can happen to your collection, they can be physically destroyed in a many different ways. Your blue ray player could die, your wife could take the collection. But in the end I think the last part punctuates it, you are cheap, and even though the alternative provides a better service at more than likely a better price you dont wanna chance it.
Or, and gosh, I am not sure where I have heard this before, you separate the infrastructure and allow more than one company to sure the cables, similar to the cable companies.. You could also stop the cable giants from blocking things like this, or community fibre, as to prevent their competition and self fulfill your prophecy.
They have about 2.9m cable, 6.2m total subscribers, so we are still less than 15% of the population of the US. Cablevision about 3m and the rest are all about 4m, add them up and we are at about 52m subscribers, or about 16.6% of the population. With 83% not subscribing my point still stands, there are anything but a few customers to tap into.
Slashdot Mirror
Then comcast should get out of the market. If it does not want me to use my internet how they claim I can use my internet then they should not be provideing me internet.
How does netflix have a free ride? The pay for every bit of bandwidth they use, and I pay for ever bit I use watching them. Now explain to me where, when 2 parties are already paying for the sum of the bandwidth, is there a free ride.
Its rather funny to see people who think this kinda thing will save them money. At the end of the day it will cost you more money. Less competition, more double dipping.
Because colonizing the Americans still had a way to get back, you could always pop back on a ship and maybe make it back.
You mean copyrights, clean rooms dont get around patents, they get around copyright.
If we all combined to buy 51% that would not kick in, unless we bought it as one entity.
I just wish I knew their criteria. I got tired of waiting so I moved 20minutes outside of Raleigh in Garner, there is a lot of houses, I have 50m cable, but will that get fiber if it comes to Raleigh.
Do we have an issue with the Supreme Court? The agency has limited terms, and have to be appointed, other than that they are supposed to be free of the authority to prevent people from swaying their job, so they can remain impartial...
He has authority over federal agencies, federal commissions are setup to be independent for a reason, mainly to prevent the stupidity that you want.
When there are people in this world, even on /. that believe this you need a little more than just an stupid comment to realize it is sarcasm.
Having no laws against something is not the same thing as allowing it. There are regulations, Comcast is required to have net neutrality for x years due to merger and the like.
I am not decrying interference, I think you are targeting the person above me.
Nothing has killed net neutrality yet.. Seeing as he was speaking to the second they kill it, we still have not reached that point.
In what way? There is not a free market in broadband because the incumbents interfere, meaning that it cannot be solved without government interference.
So the mentally handicapped, the drunk, the elderly, are severely at risk at your house?
Since when has an internet provider actually promised bandwidth, and not just said less than or equal to X amount?
Freedom from government (the arresting part) not from being sued, the first part. And we have plenty of both in the US.
Well a better question is it reasonable to limit it to non felons, as the Constitution does not say it can be limited to them...
To be clear, the Reporters Without Borders methodology is not arbitrary
Racist bigots (for affiliating with "Tea Party Extremists" when they only want a balanced budget and reasonable cuts to defense and wasteful spending).
Your quote in there makes it seem like the tea part is not extreme, but they are, very extreme....
Gun zealots when they stand up for their right to bear arm
Gun zealots are the people who support things like stand your ground, or castle laws that put human life behind property
Selfish jerks for wanting wasteful social spending cuts on the poor that seems to be fine with using SNAP funds for booze, etc. (Yes, they're a minority, but a substantial one.)
And who in the process hurt more non abusers of the system than abusers, or waste even more money (FL drug testing scheme).
Intolerant bigots for wanting to worship who or what they may - and want laws reflecting their beliefs (as long as they don't conflict with basic civil rights - and I don't mean the ever expansion of civil rights to include every minority created by individuals for their own benefit.)
There is never a good middle ground when you allow people to force their beliefs on others, and most dont care if they conflict with civil rights (gay marriage, abortion, suicide and drugs) as long as they get what they want...
Ignorant racists for questioning this administration.
Most of the time it is for something other than just questioning, unless it was just questioning because he is black
Ignorant terrorist supporters for questioning the last administration.
Cant really think of this one.. To be honest I have never heard it directly
The groups described above are generally either directly assaulted by (or blatantly marketed to) elements in the press because they think for themselves - and whether they're right or wrong, they're - well - dangerous...
Most of these people dont think for themselves, in general, they are mostly herd mentalities
As I have already pointed out in the post directly above yours that means they control 1/3 of the market, leaving 2/3, that is not a few people.
And yes that still means there is 66.66% of the market that is still not taped by them, still a far cry from few.
So again you wanna keep everyone else down because you are ok, and cannot clearly think outside your box. There are other, worse things that can happen to your collection, they can be physically destroyed in a many different ways. Your blue ray player could die, your wife could take the collection. But in the end I think the last part punctuates it, you are cheap, and even though the alternative provides a better service at more than likely a better price you dont wanna chance it.
Or, and gosh, I am not sure where I have heard this before, you separate the infrastructure and allow more than one company to sure the cables, similar to the cable companies.. You could also stop the cable giants from blocking things like this, or community fibre, as to prevent their competition and self fulfill your prophecy.
They have about 2.9m cable, 6.2m total subscribers, so we are still less than 15% of the population of the US. Cablevision about 3m and the rest are all about 4m, add them up and we are at about 52m subscribers, or about 16.6% of the population. With 83% not subscribing my point still stands, there are anything but a few customers to tap into.