Jeff Campbell, Cisco's vice president for government and community relations, has no clue what he's talking about. Stupid Bosses.
Of course some traffic types need priority. You prioritize based on the type of packet. Go for it. Just don't do it based on who it's from or to. That is the basis of net neutrality.
He's either stupid, ignorant, or deceitful. it's bad when being ignorant is your best bet......
Google Glass (and similiar tech) is here. It's in the world, and it's not going away. Lots of people complain about it, and mostly they feel like it's an invasion of privacy.
I find that odd. Our privacy is invaded all the time. The US government records every text message and call you make and no one can seem to be outraged. Meanwhile, some guy has a camera on his face (and he's not even necessarily recording) and everyone is bent out of shape. No one bats an eye when someone takes out a phone to take a pic though.
There is ONE drawback to this tech. You might get recorded.
There are several HUGE benefits. For one, it turns the surveilance around. It's been shown that cop/citizen violence goes WAY down(I seem to remember a 50% reduction reported) when everyone is recorded. That's a good thing. For two, putting these things everywhere will turn everyone a lot more polite. I know it's a popular meme that an armed society is a polite society. Well, a recorded society might ACTUALLY be more polite. For three, carrying around an alibi might put an end to the practice of rounding up "the usual suspects". No more "He's black, it was probably him." We can all SHOW we weren't there. For four, I'd love to see it mandated that all public servants wear them. It's significantly harder to make backroom shady deals when everything you're doing is being recorded, but that's really just my pipe dream.
Anyway, people are bitching about glassholes. This is just... eh. Shrug. It's loosed upon the world. It's coming, and nothing you can do is going to stop it. I happen to think the benefits are well worth it. The only real drawback is that someone might record you being an asshole.:D
The intended customer is that guy in the free candy van parked in the alley behind your house. Don't worry. He's a fellow Comcast customer. He's totally legit.:D
So. Comcast is going to let their customers access the internet through other customer's wireless routers.
Good: you can get wifi in lots of places.
Bad: You're trying to do stuff with your connection and some other people are "borrowing" your bandwidth.
I'd be much more inclined to be happy about this if Comcast was paying customer A for helping provide service to customer B. But they're not. Customer A is paying for service, and Comcast is piggybacking on that to provide service to Customer B, without benefiting customer A at all.
I'm quite biased against Comcast, frankly. This is a good idea, for them. It will help get them customers. It's a good feature. And perhaps this will convince router makers to provide a "public hotspot" option on future routers, which will be throttled of course... But I doubt it.
I can't help but look at this and compare it to the ISPs that let you farm out your connection to your neighbors, and help you charge your neighbors whatever you want... even handling the billing for you. I think that's a much nicer feature, but that's just my opinion.
I think one of the biggest problems with America, besides most of it's people not giving a shit, is that it thinks it's the only country in the world. There are plenty of countries who are what you would consider "socialist", although they all laugh at the term, and they're doing just fine.
Countries keep going. Empires rise and fall. America will fall because it's an empire, and once it does, it can get back to the business of being a country, and we'll all be better off.
Look outside the US. Yours is not the only system in the world.
As long as we have money in politics, does it matter if the rep is named Alice, Bob, or Charlie? They all vote with the money anyway. They're basically interchangeable. We MUST get the money out of politics.
I know who Michael Jackson is. I can't say he influences my actions very much. I know his name. I don't actually know anything about him. I know who Napoleon is. I can't say that he influences my actions much either. Etc etc etc..... By their methodology, I just name dropped these two guys. Big whoop. Doesn't make them influential.
Probably not. That's just starving. I have seem some research to indicate that too much food lowers lifespan, mainly due to the health effects of being overweight.
actually, it's probably best to do AFTER the chemo. Let the chemo destroy their immune system, then fast for 4 days, and bingo! New immune system. Theoretically.
I'm guessing that has more to do with available sugars. Farting is, I think, caused by gas buildup created by your gut bacteria. If they have WAY too much food, they're going to try to eat it, and make a lot of excess gas.
I keep careful track of my diet, and I notice more flatulence when I indulge in sweets. I eat a nice salad twice a day, some yogurt, nuts, drink some tea, i'm good. If I have a few extra cookies, or just eat Shit Food when i'm out with friends or something, and yeah... Bloaty McFarterson.
I wonder if this will get modded Too Much Informative?:D
What happens when they only upgrade the "fast lanes"? Imagine if they had gotten this ability 20 years ago. We'd have plentiful and cheap access to "normal lane" Dial up.... Oh, and the Fast Lanes of cable or DSL.
Then there's the other problems with your post. Assuming Google or Netflix DID pay for "faster" access, do you really think they'd deliver it to you faster than the connection you payed for? Why on earth would they do that? You have to pay to upgrade.....
I think you don't know this issue very well. Or you're being intentionally dumb to confuse the issue.:D When was your ID made? Heh.
Actually, it kind of makes me wonder how many of the posts here are real. Have I wasted time arguing with Astroturf?
I'm a T-Mobile customer, specifically because I have a GSM phone (Sprint ditched/is ditching GSM last I heard) and because T-Mobile doesn't have any stupid contracts. I pay, they give me service, we're both happy. I LIKE T-Mobile. Sure, I don't always have great coverage. it's a minor distraction at worst. It works fine.
I have my own phone (I buy used Nexus S phones, and reflash them with the latest stock Android. No stupid carrier BS on my phone!). I LIKE paying $150 for a phone, and still getting the latest wiz bangs. I LIKE not having a contract. Yes, I even like feeling a little superior to the Morons that buy new phones every 2 years and shell out $ for something that's not really essentially any better than what I have.
Damn. I hope Sprint doesn't buy T-Mobile. If they do, I hope they don't F it up...
and you managed to turn your post into an obamacare post... great job. Stay on topic.
History lesson: ISPs were regulated as common carriers. Things were good. competition existed. The FCC reclassified. They ISPs started pulling shenanigans. They FCC said to stop. Verizon took the FCC to court. The judges said "hey man, YOU classified them as information services, just reclassify them as common carriers". The FCC didn't do that. Now we're fucked.
It's in the nature of any large organization to aim for monopoly power. That's what corporations do, if they can get away with it. Microsoft did it. Intel did it. Verizon is doing it. Comcast is doing it. Etc etc etc. I know you hate government, but it does serve a purpose. There is a balance to be struck here. We do need cops. We do need laws. We need those laws to work toward the betterment of our society.
No one is proposing a government takeover. We're simply proposing we go back to the laws we had that worked well. Now we have NO laws, and it's pretty shitty.
Also, seriously, you don't need to turn everything into an Obamacare discussion. Sheesh.
I think everyone is on board. Next question. How do we lower unemployment?
I mean, with Free Trade deals all over the place, really, how do we lower unemployment? We need more jobs here. Those jobs went overseas for the cheap labor. If we tarriff to get them back, we voilate the stupid Free Trade agreements. Also, a bunch of rich old dudes will be screaming at their congresscritters.
So.... How do we lower unemployment?
Now that I wake up a bit, and think about it, we COULD go on a massive country wide push for small businesses. We could waive regulations, make financing easy, etc etc... But I'm already a small business owner, and frankly there are basically NO regulations for me besides common sense ones. Financing is dirt cheap and easy. It's not like the feds can lower interest rates all that much any more.
On the other hand, raising min wage means people have way more money to spend on my stuff. Which I kind of love. It would suck to have to pay my employee more, but I'm not an asshole and I already pay above min wage.
Anyway, your solution is dead obvious, simple, I love it... but it's simple to say, hard to do.
2. Congress has a 10% approval rating. Yet all of the congressmembers that were up for relection got reelected. Less than 50% of the US population votes. We have no one to blame but ourselves.
except that Netflix wasn't sending all that data to Comcast. Netflix's ISP was. Comcast's beef was with Netflix's ISP, not Netflix. If they had throttled that connection and cried that the peering wasn't fair, this would be a totally different arguement.
Or, maybe there are plenty of qualified candidates, and they hire the person who will bring a different perspective to their company, since their products are used by everyone. Maybe they want to know how a Single Mom is going to approach their products. Half the population is women. If you don't have any women, you might be missing something incredibly vital that could differentiate your product from your competitors. So... Hire More Women, and let them have a say.
Or, we could have your prejudiced fucked up attitude. And what does Obama have to do with it? Cough Cough not so hidden bias. We didn't bring him up. You did....
To anyone doubting there is a problem, look at the comments in this post. There are a LOT of:
There's no problem
There's no women or minorities anyway!
Why don't you just hire the best person for the job?
This is just people being oversensitive.
Women aren't interested in this stuff anyway.
Etc etc etc. There are worse comments in here too. The entire tone of all these posts is a big "fuck off" sign. You wonder why there aren't many women in tech? Look around you. That's why.
The problem is VERY real, and kudos to Google for recognizing it and trying to do something about it. These kinds of efforts make the world a better place.
I've tended to notice that whenever someone does something to make the world better, a certain segment of the population will naysay and heap shit upon it, all while not lifting a finger to fix the problem themselves. Armchair Generals are a drag on the efforts of people with initiative.
I'm a boss. There are lots of right people. The right person is someone who can get along with all the OTHER people. Aptitude is not as important as attitude. Yours is kind of selfish and cynical. I'd hire a woman over you. She's more likely to be a team player. It's a stereotype, but....
I don't think I can stress this enough. For the vast majority of positions, there are plenty of people who can do the job I need them to do. There are no rock stars needed. We have rock stars. They cause problems and unneeded stress. I need bright motivated people who get along well. One asshole ruins motivation for everyone.
That's why we need diversity. That's why we need people with emotional intelligence. Then there's the whole "diversity of experiences helps come up with clever solutions to the problems we are trying to overcome." thing, which is really really important.
I work in the tech industry, at one of the largest companies IN the tech industry. We need more people with decent social skills. We need diversity. We need a lot less angry testosterone driven assholes.
Bias exists.
There's a problem. Someone is trying to fix that problem and make the world a better place. To paraphrase the kids these days, "Why haters gotta hate?" Why are you questioning Google trying to do some good?
We can genetically engineer humanoids to survive on mars. They can be big, strong, blue, and have stomachs able to digest roughage, and as long as we don't treat them like slaves they'll never come back and start a war with us....
Slashdot Mirror
Jeff Campbell, Cisco's vice president for government and community relations, has no clue what he's talking about. Stupid Bosses.
Of course some traffic types need priority. You prioritize based on the type of packet. Go for it. Just don't do it based on who it's from or to. That is the basis of net neutrality.
He's either stupid, ignorant, or deceitful. it's bad when being ignorant is your best bet......
Google Glass (and similiar tech) is here. It's in the world, and it's not going away. Lots of people complain about it, and mostly they feel like it's an invasion of privacy.
I find that odd. Our privacy is invaded all the time. The US government records every text message and call you make and no one can seem to be outraged. Meanwhile, some guy has a camera on his face (and he's not even necessarily recording) and everyone is bent out of shape. No one bats an eye when someone takes out a phone to take a pic though.
There is ONE drawback to this tech. You might get recorded.
There are several HUGE benefits. For one, it turns the surveilance around. It's been shown that cop/citizen violence goes WAY down(I seem to remember a 50% reduction reported) when everyone is recorded. That's a good thing. For two, putting these things everywhere will turn everyone a lot more polite. I know it's a popular meme that an armed society is a polite society. Well, a recorded society might ACTUALLY be more polite. For three, carrying around an alibi might put an end to the practice of rounding up "the usual suspects". No more "He's black, it was probably him." We can all SHOW we weren't there. For four, I'd love to see it mandated that all public servants wear them. It's significantly harder to make backroom shady deals when everything you're doing is being recorded, but that's really just my pipe dream.
Anyway, people are bitching about glassholes. This is just... eh. Shrug. It's loosed upon the world. It's coming, and nothing you can do is going to stop it. I happen to think the benefits are well worth it. The only real drawback is that someone might record you being an asshole. :D
The intended customer is that guy in the free candy van parked in the alley behind your house. Don't worry. He's a fellow Comcast customer. He's totally legit. :D
So. Comcast is going to let their customers access the internet through other customer's wireless routers.
Good: you can get wifi in lots of places.
Bad: You're trying to do stuff with your connection and some other people are "borrowing" your bandwidth.
I'd be much more inclined to be happy about this if Comcast was paying customer A for helping provide service to customer B. But they're not. Customer A is paying for service, and Comcast is piggybacking on that to provide service to Customer B, without benefiting customer A at all.
I'm quite biased against Comcast, frankly. This is a good idea, for them. It will help get them customers. It's a good feature. And perhaps this will convince router makers to provide a "public hotspot" option on future routers, which will be throttled of course... But I doubt it.
I can't help but look at this and compare it to the ISPs that let you farm out your connection to your neighbors, and help you charge your neighbors whatever you want... even handling the billing for you. I think that's a much nicer feature, but that's just my opinion.
I think one of the biggest problems with America, besides most of it's people not giving a shit, is that it thinks it's the only country in the world. There are plenty of countries who are what you would consider "socialist", although they all laugh at the term, and they're doing just fine.
Countries keep going. Empires rise and fall. America will fall because it's an empire, and once it does, it can get back to the business of being a country, and we'll all be better off.
Look outside the US. Yours is not the only system in the world.
As long as we have money in politics, does it matter if the rep is named Alice, Bob, or Charlie? They all vote with the money anyway. They're basically interchangeable. We MUST get the money out of politics.
I know who Michael Jackson is. I can't say he influences my actions very much. I know his name. I don't actually know anything about him. I know who Napoleon is. I can't say that he influences my actions much either. Etc etc etc..... By their methodology, I just name dropped these two guys. Big whoop. Doesn't make them influential.
Probably not. That's just starving. I have seem some research to indicate that too much food lowers lifespan, mainly due to the health effects of being overweight.
actually, it's probably best to do AFTER the chemo. Let the chemo destroy their immune system, then fast for 4 days, and bingo! New immune system. Theoretically.
I'm guessing that has more to do with available sugars. Farting is, I think, caused by gas buildup created by your gut bacteria. If they have WAY too much food, they're going to try to eat it, and make a lot of excess gas.
I keep careful track of my diet, and I notice more flatulence when I indulge in sweets. I eat a nice salad twice a day, some yogurt, nuts, drink some tea, i'm good. If I have a few extra cookies, or just eat Shit Food when i'm out with friends or something, and yeah... Bloaty McFarterson.
I wonder if this will get modded Too Much Informative? :D
" Even suggesting that starvation is just a form of fasting is naive and ignorant." Don't forget Assholeish. It's definitely that too.
So, what are the health benefits from stoning people for doing things I don't like? :D What? It's in the scriptures!
Per the article... Don't eat for 3-4 days, and do it every 6 months. Frankly, doing it once will give you a basically sparkling new immune system.
What happens when they only upgrade the "fast lanes"? Imagine if they had gotten this ability 20 years ago. We'd have plentiful and cheap access to "normal lane" Dial up.... Oh, and the Fast Lanes of cable or DSL.
Then there's the other problems with your post. Assuming Google or Netflix DID pay for "faster" access, do you really think they'd deliver it to you faster than the connection you payed for? Why on earth would they do that? You have to pay to upgrade.....
I think you don't know this issue very well. Or you're being intentionally dumb to confuse the issue. :D When was your ID made? Heh.
Actually, it kind of makes me wonder how many of the posts here are real. Have I wasted time arguing with Astroturf?
I'm a T-Mobile customer, specifically because I have a GSM phone (Sprint ditched/is ditching GSM last I heard) and because T-Mobile doesn't have any stupid contracts. I pay, they give me service, we're both happy. I LIKE T-Mobile. Sure, I don't always have great coverage. it's a minor distraction at worst. It works fine.
I have my own phone (I buy used Nexus S phones, and reflash them with the latest stock Android. No stupid carrier BS on my phone!). I LIKE paying $150 for a phone, and still getting the latest wiz bangs. I LIKE not having a contract. Yes, I even like feeling a little superior to the Morons that buy new phones every 2 years and shell out $ for something that's not really essentially any better than what I have.
Damn. I hope Sprint doesn't buy T-Mobile. If they do, I hope they don't F it up...
and you managed to turn your post into an obamacare post... great job. Stay on topic.
History lesson: ISPs were regulated as common carriers. Things were good. competition existed. The FCC reclassified. They ISPs started pulling shenanigans. They FCC said to stop. Verizon took the FCC to court. The judges said "hey man, YOU classified them as information services, just reclassify them as common carriers". The FCC didn't do that. Now we're fucked.
It's in the nature of any large organization to aim for monopoly power. That's what corporations do, if they can get away with it. Microsoft did it. Intel did it. Verizon is doing it. Comcast is doing it. Etc etc etc. I know you hate government, but it does serve a purpose. There is a balance to be struck here. We do need cops. We do need laws. We need those laws to work toward the betterment of our society.
No one is proposing a government takeover. We're simply proposing we go back to the laws we had that worked well. Now we have NO laws, and it's pretty shitty.
Also, seriously, you don't need to turn everything into an Obamacare discussion. Sheesh.
Great!
I think everyone is on board. Next question. How do we lower unemployment?
I mean, with Free Trade deals all over the place, really, how do we lower unemployment? We need more jobs here. Those jobs went overseas for the cheap labor. If we tarriff to get them back, we voilate the stupid Free Trade agreements. Also, a bunch of rich old dudes will be screaming at their congresscritters.
So.... How do we lower unemployment?
Now that I wake up a bit, and think about it, we COULD go on a massive country wide push for small businesses. We could waive regulations, make financing easy, etc etc... But I'm already a small business owner, and frankly there are basically NO regulations for me besides common sense ones. Financing is dirt cheap and easy. It's not like the feds can lower interest rates all that much any more.
On the other hand, raising min wage means people have way more money to spend on my stuff. Which I kind of love. It would suck to have to pay my employee more, but I'm not an asshole and I already pay above min wage.
Anyway, your solution is dead obvious, simple, I love it... but it's simple to say, hard to do.
1. I want to join this Tits and Wine party.
2. Congress has a 10% approval rating. Yet all of the congressmembers that were up for relection got reelected. Less than 50% of the US population votes. We have no one to blame but ourselves.
except that Netflix wasn't sending all that data to Comcast. Netflix's ISP was. Comcast's beef was with Netflix's ISP, not Netflix. If they had throttled that connection and cried that the peering wasn't fair, this would be a totally different arguement.
Or, maybe there are plenty of qualified candidates, and they hire the person who will bring a different perspective to their company, since their products are used by everyone. Maybe they want to know how a Single Mom is going to approach their products. Half the population is women. If you don't have any women, you might be missing something incredibly vital that could differentiate your product from your competitors. So... Hire More Women, and let them have a say.
Or, we could have your prejudiced fucked up attitude. And what does Obama have to do with it? Cough Cough not so hidden bias. We didn't bring him up. You did....
To anyone doubting there is a problem, look at the comments in this post. There are a LOT of:
There's no problem
There's no women or minorities anyway!
Why don't you just hire the best person for the job?
This is just people being oversensitive.
Women aren't interested in this stuff anyway.
Etc etc etc. There are worse comments in here too. The entire tone of all these posts is a big "fuck off" sign. You wonder why there aren't many women in tech? Look around you. That's why.
The problem is VERY real, and kudos to Google for recognizing it and trying to do something about it. These kinds of efforts make the world a better place.
I've tended to notice that whenever someone does something to make the world better, a certain segment of the population will naysay and heap shit upon it, all while not lifting a finger to fix the problem themselves. Armchair Generals are a drag on the efforts of people with initiative.
I'm a boss. There are lots of right people. The right person is someone who can get along with all the OTHER people. Aptitude is not as important as attitude. Yours is kind of selfish and cynical. I'd hire a woman over you. She's more likely to be a team player. It's a stereotype, but....
I don't think I can stress this enough. For the vast majority of positions, there are plenty of people who can do the job I need them to do. There are no rock stars needed. We have rock stars. They cause problems and unneeded stress. I need bright motivated people who get along well. One asshole ruins motivation for everyone.
That's why we need diversity. That's why we need people with emotional intelligence. Then there's the whole "diversity of experiences helps come up with clever solutions to the problems we are trying to overcome." thing, which is really really important.
I work in the tech industry, at one of the largest companies IN the tech industry. We need more people with decent social skills. We need diversity. We need a lot less angry testosterone driven assholes.
Bias exists.
There's a problem. Someone is trying to fix that problem and make the world a better place. To paraphrase the kids these days, "Why haters gotta hate?" Why are you questioning Google trying to do some good?
http://latta.house.gov/contact/ His number is Washington DC is Phone: (202) 225-6405. His Ohio toll free number is 800-541-6446.
Send him an email, or ring him. Please be polite.
We can genetically engineer humanoids to survive on mars. They can be big, strong, blue, and have stomachs able to digest roughage, and as long as we don't treat them like slaves they'll never come back and start a war with us....
too obscure? :D