1. Free Software
You didn't pay anything for this software. No one paid the developers anything for this software. You have the capacity to change this software if you don't like something about it.
False. Plenty of the developers for KDE are getting paid. Aaron Seigo (one of the main developers and project leader) gets paid, and he's in europe right now partying it up, just like he was partying at Google headquarters last year for the 4.0 release.
KDE was adamantly clear that KDE 4.0 was not a 'user' release, but was solely for third party developers to actually get involved and start porting, and to make a difference.
Wha?!? Please point me to where on the KDE4.0 release http://www.kde.org/announcements/4.0/ page they made it "adamantly clear that KDE 4.0 was not a user release."
They did say:
The KDE Community is thrilled to announce the immediate availability of KDE 4.0. This significant release marks both the end of the long and intensive development cycle leading up to KDE 4.0 and the beginning of the KDE 4 era.
and
The KDE 4 Desktop has gained some major new capabilities.
and
Lots of KDE Applications have seen improvements as well.
and
KDE 4.0 is the innovative Free Software desktop containing lots of applications for every day use as well as for specific purposes.
I wish the KDE fanboys (and the KDE developers themselves) would stop trying to rewrite recent history and just admit there were mistakes made.
Keyboard shortcuts have worked the whole time (at least for me). Working global keyboard shortcuts, not so much (at least if we're talking about multimedia keys in my case). Somehow KWin's global shortcuts work so in the end I don't notice but Alt-F2 has worked since KDE 4.0 so maybe I'm just not experiencing some long standing bug which you're hitting.:(
I was referring to the broken khotkeys which I believe is supposed to be fixed in 4.2 (I haven't tried it myself). It was impossible using KDE settings to create a keyboard shortcut to a terminal, which for a linux desktop I consider absolutely essential (the settings dialogs were in place, they just didn't work, and no error message). But perhaps that is mostly my personal pet peeve. The other big feature regression that irks me is the lack of video thumbnails in dolphin/konqueror.
As far as the alpha/beta thing, there's plenty of room for argument there, but nevertheless there should have been some sort of warning to users (and maybe to distributions) that it was not intended for use by the general public, but only for developers.
Well not only is that not true as I already mentioned, but your latter point is also not true. I know it's easy to blame the shift of focus that we employed in KDE 4 on everything, but the fact of the matter is that it actually brought in quite a few developers as well... We have people working on the art, basic desktop and games, areas which were mostly unmaintained in KDE 3. Things like the KDE TechBase I already mentioned were created as part of making it easy to develop for KDE. Again though, if you have something specifically that you have in mind then say so as developer support is a very high priority for KDE.
I'd say if it takes you two stable releases to implement very basic functionality like working keyboard shortcuts, then you suffer from a lack of manpower.
It's also hard to believe you can look at the kde4 release announcement http://www.kde.org/announcements/4.0/ and not see the problem. What needed to be explained on that page was that KDE4.0 was not ready for everyday use.
"KDE 4.0 is the innovative Free Software desktop containing lots of applications for every day use as well as for specific purposes. Plasma is a new desktop shell developed for KDE 4, providing an intuitive interface to interact with the desktop and applications..."
...doesn't cut it. It was in an alpha stage, yet the release announcement read like it was a final stable release.
I agree, the release of KDE4 was horribly mismanaged, and this was due in no small part to the seeming arrogance and ineptitude of Aaron Seigo. He was at the forefront of the pre KDE4 release hype, and responded to all criticism after the inevitable disappointment following the release of KDE4 with dismissive scorn. I remember him claiming that people were having trouble understanding KDE4 because they have never been part of something so great, or some such nonsense.
He was also constantly throwing around silly marketing speak terms like "revolution" and "a new paradigm" to try and make excuses for a project which was obviously alpha quality. Not to mention he was in charge of the most incomplete part of KDE4, plasma.
Aseigo may be a great programmer, but he should be stuck in a backroom and confined to programming. His marketing and personal interaction skills are terrible. If I were in charge (which of course I'm not, just my opinion) Seigo would be fired for his instrumental part in making the release of KDE4 such a disaster.
Child porn is defined by what it is, not who has it. There is no difference between someone who is 15 or 35 shoplifting. Why should be be different here?
This is another example children wanting to be treated like adults - except when it's inconvenient for them. Then, all of a sudden, they are "just children".
We live in world where 1st graders are performing oral sex on each other when a teacher walks out of the world. I guess we should just allow that to happen. After all, they are "just children".
Not sure if you are trolling, but the obvious reason as to why it should be different here is that there are no victims involved. The only victimization is being caused by the state with their felony prosecutions. When a 15 year old or a 35 year old shoplifts, the victim is the same: the store. When a teen takes a picture of themselves and sends it to another person, they are not victimizing anyone.
And while we may not want to allow first graders to perform oral sex on each other, I certainly wouldn't advocate throwing them in prison for being child molesters.
But in principle, I have no problem with the government banning unprotected stuff like this. Never, including at our nations founding, was this sort of material considered protected free speech.
I'm sorry, but the founding fathers didn't have child pornography in mind as a possible exception to the rights protected by the First Amendment. In fact, the Supreme Court only ruled that child pornography was unprotected speech in 1981 (or 82?).
Despite the predominant groupthink of the past few years, the possession of certain pictures being considered the most heinous crime imaginable was not always the case.
And it's not a black and white issue. Child pornography has always had a vague and fluid definition, as evidenced by the latest inclusions into the category, Simpsons cartoons and anime.
Well, wow runs ok in wine; Full screen only. The framerates are really much worse if you play in windowed mode. Since Alt+Tab didn't work in full screen mode windowed was pretty much a requirement when I played it...
Wow works fine in windowed mode for me using wine. But in any case, if you are using full screen mode, just switch desktops (ctrl-alt-right or whatever) if you want to surf the web while playing.
Well it's simple really. It's not a feature that the developers use. That's how free software works. You implement things you need or like before other things.
Which would be fine if KDE was just someone's hobby. But there are developers such as Aaron Seigo who get paid to work on KDE, so he shouldn't be just motivated by his personal desire to have twitter desktop widgets take priority over all else.
Yes, you can use xbindkeys, which isn't hard to set up, but is this really something you should have to do with a desktop environment like KDE? I can understand using a program like xbindkeys for a less featured window manager like openbox and fluxbox, but KDE?!? (Not to mention the fact that both openbox and fluxbox allow for customization of keyboard shortcuts)
It boggles the mind that it took the KDE folks a full year to (supposedly) get simple configurable keyboard shortcuts working on KDE4. How could that have possibly been that far down on the "to-do" list?
The child porn statute I'm referring to is the federal one.
I highly doubt anyone could get a child porn conviction based on the Simpsons movie, I'm just making the points that (1) it's conceivably possible, and more importantly, (2) that a sex act is not a requirement for child pornography.
I wish it wasn't necessary. I wish that we were all wise enough to fully see the complete ramifications of every law we write. But that just isn't the reality we live in. I hate to see kids branded with the "Sexual predator" label. but the realist in me knows it's necessary, and ultimately a good thing IF it helps bring about change.
How absurdly hypocritical can you be? You think in order to protect children we have to ruin the lives of some children?!? And that's a good thing? I wonder if you'd still want to err on the side of punishment if one of your kids was put on the sex offender registry for taking a nude picture of themselves.
And what "change" are you hoping to bring about? Having everyone afraid to take a picture of even the most innocuous subject, petrified that they may be arrested on child porn charges and branded a sex offender?
If nudity was equivalent to pornography, a simple Pampers commercial could be considered obscene. So could a parent's photos of their kids bathing. Or a great number of paintings, photos and feature films that have been produced and exhibited all over the world.
And therein lies the problem with the current child pornography laws (and obscenity laws in general). Remember that people have been convicted on child pornography charges for videos and pictures of clothed minors based on that lascivious exhibition part. The definition is so broad at this point that it all but forces selective enforcement.
It is wise to remember that the final verdict on what is and isn't illegal is rendered by a jury, so even if the prosecutor is out to railroad you on a technicality using your vacation pictures, he has to convince 12 of your peers that you deserve to go to jail.
Yet if the criminal statute is broad enough, it will be easy for a prosecutor to get a conviction from a jury (not even considering that most americans would convict a walnut shell for possessing a golden girls DVD if the indictment was for child porn charges). Jury nullification is grounds for a mistrial in many jurisdictions. The jury can't decide, "well he's not guilty because that law's just plain silly." They are there to decide if the facts fit the elements of the crime, and if the elements of the crime are preposterous (as they are here), then there's a better chance than you may think of getting a conviction.
Child Porn laws, on the other hand are designed to try and protect children by dismantling Kiddie porn distribution networks and arresting those that partake of and help support Child Porn. Let's not forget that Actual child porn involving real children IS abuse, and results in permanent harm (both psychological and physical) to a child. This is something that any healthy society should strive to prevent.
Yes, what a shame there are no other laws that punish the abuse and rape of a minor, so that it is necessary to protect them by making vague laws restricting different types of information and data. Clear up some confusion for me. Putting aside the obvious issue of teens taking pictures of themselves, arresting and imprisoning some loser who downloads a picture of child pornography off of usenet and never shares it with anyone else protects the child how?
Wrong. Naked isn't equivalent to pornographic. If Bart had been depicted in a sex act, that could be considered pornographic. Nudity alone isn't sufficient.
Wrong. For purposes of the child pornography statute, nudity alone is certainly sufficient, as long as there is a "lascivious exhibition of the genitals" (in fact, nudity isn't even required). The scene referred to from the Simpsons movie could arguably fit that definition.
I haven't been back home for almost 5 years, but it saddens me to see that only 7000 people were in protest.
It is sad. Those pictures of the protest on computerworld.com make the gathering look pathetic. I've seen more people waiting in line for "doorbuster" sales at box stores. Not a diverse bunch either, mostly 20something nerdy types.
It was sneaky in that the guy exploited a loophole to hurt children and make child porn.
He hurt them by... taking pictures of them naked with consent of their parents? You know what's even worse? These same children and many others around the world have to look at themselves in the mirror, naked, nearly every day. Naked! When will this constant deluge of naked pornography end?
19th century Britain telegraphed. They want their prudery back.
I think the important thing to keep in mind is point 1 - we know that the creation sexual photographs of (real) children exploits children, so we must prevent it.
Here's a thought: how about we arrest people who are actually committing the crimes depicted in the photographs, i.e. rape/molestation, rather than focusing almost entirely on the photographs themselves?
Western societies have developed a strange fixation with child pornography, elevating it to a level of heinousness far beyond the actual act of child rape it may depict (of course all of the self-shot post-pubescent teen porn is lumped in as well, where there are no victims). I guess the governments and law enforcement officials have gotten their wish... the hysteria has allowed them to put a stranglehold on freedom of speech on the internet, and very few question it. "We must prevent it" by widescale monitoring and censorship of the internet.
Every 20 years or so for the past several hundred years, societies swing between prohibition and tolerance. One generation tries hard to outlaw substances, then the next generation tries hard to legalize it. In the 80's it was the war on drugs. In this decade it's legalizing dope. It's nonstop back and forth, back and forth.
Hardly what I would call back and forth. For the past 80 or so years:
One generation tries hard to outlaw substances and increase penalties: they succeed with flying colors. Ever harsher laws are piled on top of the old ones. Prison sentences, fines, warrant exceptions... all multiply.
The next generation tries hard to legalize it: they fail or at best have minor victories (decriminalization as opposed to legalization).
This isn't some sort of pendulum swing situation. The prohibition crowd has been winning handily for decades. If that is what you consider "winning" anyway.
Get real. Minimum wage workers in most places don't have to put up with being beaten on a regular basis, not to mention risking their life on daily basis to do their jobs.
I don't have numbers to back up how many craigslist prostitutes get "beaten up on a regular basis" and I bet you don't either.
In any case, coal miners risk their lives on a daily basis, and workers in such dangerous jobs often get paid more to risk their lives. Kinda like prostitutes.
Why do you Australians have a strange obsessive need to bark at people who criticize any ISP plan that isn't as backwards and terrible as yours? We get it. Your internet service in Australia sucks. It's terrible. It's at 1990-era levels, and you're hoping to import 9600 baud modems someday. You live in caves and sometimes it's difficult to start fires with the limited flint you have available, so your smoke-signal internet is offline frequently. Understood.
You see, a good portion of the world doesn't have to deal with internet access relying on expensive undersea cables. We have the capability to create a much better infrastructure, with a lot more bandwidth. Being complacent about your bandwidth needs will allow ISPs to empty your wallet and stifle future innovation. A lot of new internet delivered products (hulu, netflix, HD movies) depend on serious amounts of bandwidth being available. 10 gb/month is not going to cut it if we want progress. 250 gb/month is fine for now, but it won't be in five years. If you are going to keep these ISPs on their toes you have to start bitching and moaning immediately!
Slashdot Mirror
There were mistakes made.
Thank you!
1. Free Software You didn't pay anything for this software. No one paid the developers anything for this software. You have the capacity to change this software if you don't like something about it.
False. Plenty of the developers for KDE are getting paid. Aaron Seigo (one of the main developers and project leader) gets paid, and he's in europe right now partying it up, just like he was partying at Google headquarters last year for the 4.0 release.
KDE was adamantly clear that KDE 4.0 was not a 'user' release, but was solely for third party developers to actually get involved and start porting, and to make a difference.
Wha?!? Please point me to where on the KDE4.0 release http://www.kde.org/announcements/4.0/ page they made it "adamantly clear that KDE 4.0 was not a user release." They did say:
The KDE Community is thrilled to announce the immediate availability of KDE 4.0. This significant release marks both the end of the long and intensive development cycle leading up to KDE 4.0 and the beginning of the KDE 4 era.
and
The KDE 4 Desktop has gained some major new capabilities.
and
Lots of KDE Applications have seen improvements as well.
and
KDE 4.0 is the innovative Free Software desktop containing lots of applications for every day use as well as for specific purposes.
I wish the KDE fanboys (and the KDE developers themselves) would stop trying to rewrite recent history and just admit there were mistakes made.
Keyboard shortcuts have worked the whole time (at least for me). Working global keyboard shortcuts, not so much (at least if we're talking about multimedia keys in my case). Somehow KWin's global shortcuts work so in the end I don't notice but Alt-F2 has worked since KDE 4.0 so maybe I'm just not experiencing some long standing bug which you're hitting. :(
I was referring to the broken khotkeys which I believe is supposed to be fixed in 4.2 (I haven't tried it myself). It was impossible using KDE settings to create a keyboard shortcut to a terminal, which for a linux desktop I consider absolutely essential (the settings dialogs were in place, they just didn't work, and no error message). But perhaps that is mostly my personal pet peeve. The other big feature regression that irks me is the lack of video thumbnails in dolphin/konqueror.
As far as the alpha/beta thing, there's plenty of room for argument there, but nevertheless there should have been some sort of warning to users (and maybe to distributions) that it was not intended for use by the general public, but only for developers.
Well not only is that not true as I already mentioned, but your latter point is also not true. I know it's easy to blame the shift of focus that we employed in KDE 4 on everything, but the fact of the matter is that it actually brought in quite a few developers as well... We have people working on the art, basic desktop and games, areas which were mostly unmaintained in KDE 3. Things like the KDE TechBase I already mentioned were created as part of making it easy to develop for KDE. Again though, if you have something specifically that you have in mind then say so as developer support is a very high priority for KDE.
I'd say if it takes you two stable releases to implement very basic functionality like working keyboard shortcuts, then you suffer from a lack of manpower.
It's also hard to believe you can look at the kde4 release announcement http://www.kde.org/announcements/4.0/ and not see the problem. What needed to be explained on that page was that KDE4.0 was not ready for everyday use.
"KDE 4.0 is the innovative Free Software desktop containing lots of applications for every day use as well as for specific purposes. Plasma is a new desktop shell developed for KDE 4, providing an intuitive interface to interact with the desktop and applications..."
I agree, the release of KDE4 was horribly mismanaged, and this was due in no small part to the seeming arrogance and ineptitude of Aaron Seigo. He was at the forefront of the pre KDE4 release hype, and responded to all criticism after the inevitable disappointment following the release of KDE4 with dismissive scorn. I remember him claiming that people were having trouble understanding KDE4 because they have never been part of something so great, or some such nonsense.
He was also constantly throwing around silly marketing speak terms like "revolution" and "a new paradigm" to try and make excuses for a project which was obviously alpha quality. Not to mention he was in charge of the most incomplete part of KDE4, plasma.
Aseigo may be a great programmer, but he should be stuck in a backroom and confined to programming. His marketing and personal interaction skills are terrible. If I were in charge (which of course I'm not, just my opinion) Seigo would be fired for his instrumental part in making the release of KDE4 such a disaster.
Not sure if you are trolling, but the obvious reason as to why it should be different here is that there are no victims involved. The only victimization is being caused by the state with their felony prosecutions. When a 15 year old or a 35 year old shoplifts, the victim is the same: the store. When a teen takes a picture of themselves and sends it to another person, they are not victimizing anyone.
And while we may not want to allow first graders to perform oral sex on each other, I certainly wouldn't advocate throwing them in prison for being child molesters.
But in principle, I have no problem with the government banning unprotected stuff like this. Never, including at our nations founding, was this sort of material considered protected free speech.
I'm sorry, but the founding fathers didn't have child pornography in mind as a possible exception to the rights protected by the First Amendment. In fact, the Supreme Court only ruled that child pornography was unprotected speech in 1981 (or 82?).
Despite the predominant groupthink of the past few years, the possession of certain pictures being considered the most heinous crime imaginable was not always the case.
And it's not a black and white issue. Child pornography has always had a vague and fluid definition, as evidenced by the latest inclusions into the category, Simpsons cartoons and anime.
Bruises heal without any effort, and as a kid it's usually within days. Emotional scars can last a lifetime.
What utter nonsense. And I suppose you don't think you get emotional scarring from having the crap kicked out of you by a playground bully?
Well, wow runs ok in wine; Full screen only. The framerates are really much worse if you play in windowed mode. Since Alt+Tab didn't work in full screen mode windowed was pretty much a requirement when I played it ...
Wow works fine in windowed mode for me using wine. But in any case, if you are using full screen mode, just switch desktops (ctrl-alt-right or whatever) if you want to surf the web while playing.
Well it's simple really. It's not a feature that the developers use. That's how free software works. You implement things you need or like before other things.
Which would be fine if KDE was just someone's hobby. But there are developers such as Aaron Seigo who get paid to work on KDE, so he shouldn't be just motivated by his personal desire to have twitter desktop widgets take priority over all else.
Yes, you can use xbindkeys, which isn't hard to set up, but is this really something you should have to do with a desktop environment like KDE? I can understand using a program like xbindkeys for a less featured window manager like openbox and fluxbox, but KDE?!? (Not to mention the fact that both openbox and fluxbox allow for customization of keyboard shortcuts)
It boggles the mind that it took the KDE folks a full year to (supposedly) get simple configurable keyboard shortcuts working on KDE4. How could that have possibly been that far down on the "to-do" list?
The child porn statute I'm referring to is the federal one.
I highly doubt anyone could get a child porn conviction based on the Simpsons movie, I'm just making the points that (1) it's conceivably possible, and more importantly, (2) that a sex act is not a requirement for child pornography.
I wish it wasn't necessary. I wish that we were all wise enough to fully see the complete ramifications of every law we write. But that just isn't the reality we live in. I hate to see kids branded with the "Sexual predator" label. but the realist in me knows it's necessary, and ultimately a good thing IF it helps bring about change.
How absurdly hypocritical can you be? You think in order to protect children we have to ruin the lives of some children?!? And that's a good thing? I wonder if you'd still want to err on the side of punishment if one of your kids was put on the sex offender registry for taking a nude picture of themselves.
And what "change" are you hoping to bring about? Having everyone afraid to take a picture of even the most innocuous subject, petrified that they may be arrested on child porn charges and branded a sex offender?
If nudity was equivalent to pornography, a simple Pampers commercial could be considered obscene. So could a parent's photos of their kids bathing. Or a great number of paintings, photos and feature films that have been produced and exhibited all over the world.
And therein lies the problem with the current child pornography laws (and obscenity laws in general). Remember that people have been convicted on child pornography charges for videos and pictures of clothed minors based on that lascivious exhibition part. The definition is so broad at this point that it all but forces selective enforcement.
It is wise to remember that the final verdict on what is and isn't illegal is rendered by a jury, so even if the prosecutor is out to railroad you on a technicality using your vacation pictures, he has to convince 12 of your peers that you deserve to go to jail.
Yet if the criminal statute is broad enough, it will be easy for a prosecutor to get a conviction from a jury (not even considering that most americans would convict a walnut shell for possessing a golden girls DVD if the indictment was for child porn charges). Jury nullification is grounds for a mistrial in many jurisdictions. The jury can't decide, "well he's not guilty because that law's just plain silly." They are there to decide if the facts fit the elements of the crime, and if the elements of the crime are preposterous (as they are here), then there's a better chance than you may think of getting a conviction.
Child Porn laws, on the other hand are designed to try and protect children by dismantling Kiddie porn distribution networks and arresting those that partake of and help support Child Porn. Let's not forget that Actual child porn involving real children IS abuse, and results in permanent harm (both psychological and physical) to a child. This is something that any healthy society should strive to prevent.
Yes, what a shame there are no other laws that punish the abuse and rape of a minor, so that it is necessary to protect them by making vague laws restricting different types of information and data. Clear up some confusion for me. Putting aside the obvious issue of teens taking pictures of themselves, arresting and imprisoning some loser who downloads a picture of child pornography off of usenet and never shares it with anyone else protects the child how?
Wrong. Naked isn't equivalent to pornographic. If Bart had been depicted in a sex act, that could be considered pornographic. Nudity alone isn't sufficient.
Wrong. For purposes of the child pornography statute, nudity alone is certainly sufficient, as long as there is a "lascivious exhibition of the genitals" (in fact, nudity isn't even required). The scene referred to from the Simpsons movie could arguably fit that definition.
I haven't been back home for almost 5 years, but it saddens me to see that only 7000 people were in protest.
It is sad. Those pictures of the protest on computerworld.com make the gathering look pathetic. I've seen more people waiting in line for "doorbuster" sales at box stores. Not a diverse bunch either, mostly 20something nerdy types.
The guy took photos of naked children.
Outrageous!
It was sneaky in that the guy exploited a loophole to hurt children and make child porn.
He hurt them by... taking pictures of them naked with consent of their parents? You know what's even worse? These same children and many others around the world have to look at themselves in the mirror, naked, nearly every day. Naked! When will this constant deluge of naked pornography end?
19th century Britain telegraphed. They want their prudery back.
I think the important thing to keep in mind is point 1 - we know that the creation sexual photographs of (real) children exploits children, so we must prevent it.
Here's a thought: how about we arrest people who are actually committing the crimes depicted in the photographs, i.e. rape/molestation, rather than focusing almost entirely on the photographs themselves?
Western societies have developed a strange fixation with child pornography, elevating it to a level of heinousness far beyond the actual act of child rape it may depict (of course all of the self-shot post-pubescent teen porn is lumped in as well, where there are no victims). I guess the governments and law enforcement officials have gotten their wish... the hysteria has allowed them to put a stranglehold on freedom of speech on the internet, and very few question it. "We must prevent it" by widescale monitoring and censorship of the internet.
Every 20 years or so for the past several hundred years, societies swing between prohibition and tolerance. One generation tries hard to outlaw substances, then the next generation tries hard to legalize it. In the 80's it was the war on drugs. In this decade it's legalizing dope. It's nonstop back and forth, back and forth.
Hardly what I would call back and forth. For the past 80 or so years:
One generation tries hard to outlaw substances and increase penalties: they succeed with flying colors. Ever harsher laws are piled on top of the old ones. Prison sentences, fines, warrant exceptions... all multiply.
The next generation tries hard to legalize it: they fail or at best have minor victories (decriminalization as opposed to legalization).
This isn't some sort of pendulum swing situation. The prohibition crowd has been winning handily for decades. If that is what you consider "winning" anyway.
Get real. Minimum wage workers in most places don't have to put up with being beaten on a regular basis, not to mention risking their life on daily basis to do their jobs.
I don't have numbers to back up how many craigslist prostitutes get "beaten up on a regular basis" and I bet you don't either.
In any case, coal miners risk their lives on a daily basis, and workers in such dangerous jobs often get paid more to risk their lives. Kinda like prostitutes.
Prostitutes are almost always victims in several reguards.
So are minimum wage workers. What's your point?
Why do you Australians have a strange obsessive need to bark at people who criticize any ISP plan that isn't as backwards and terrible as yours? We get it. Your internet service in Australia sucks. It's terrible. It's at 1990-era levels, and you're hoping to import 9600 baud modems someday. You live in caves and sometimes it's difficult to start fires with the limited flint you have available, so your smoke-signal internet is offline frequently. Understood.
You see, a good portion of the world doesn't have to deal with internet access relying on expensive undersea cables. We have the capability to create a much better infrastructure, with a lot more bandwidth. Being complacent about your bandwidth needs will allow ISPs to empty your wallet and stifle future innovation. A lot of new internet delivered products (hulu, netflix, HD movies) depend on serious amounts of bandwidth being available. 10 gb/month is not going to cut it if we want progress. 250 gb/month is fine for now, but it won't be in five years. If you are going to keep these ISPs on their toes you have to start bitching and moaning immediately!