No, a web server is meant to do whatever the person who bought it and provisioned it and is paying for the admin time, power, and bandwidth WANTS it to do. Just because you want to be able to tell other people what to do with their own money doesn't mean you get to.
but the WWW should also be neutral and servers should not discriminate against user agents
Why not? If I'm running a web server and don't have unlimited resources to pay for horsepower and bandwidth, why shouldn't I be able to tell my server to handle some requests differently than others if that suits me? I know why. Because you have no idea what it's like to actually pay for anything, but still want to tell other people how to run their lives.
Next month, "Help me, other tax payers who aren't idiots! My mortgage is now bigger than the market value of my house. Make a law that makes the bank put my mortgage back the way it was! It's not fair!"
If you are interested in conspiracies then you need look no further than our own President's election campaign.
Exactly. The fantasists who see conspiracies there are quite imaginative. Which is important if you're trying really hard to distract from the actual ones (which, happily, didn't return their intended results back in November).
And combine that with popular entertainment slipping images of flying saucers into people's brains, and you get the same effect that people experienced when it was OLDER popular entertainment filling their heads with angels or the like. Carl Sagan did a really good job of exploring that topic in "Demon Haunted World," which is still worth a read quite a few years after it was published.
Though not AS volatile, it's the same sort of problem that would come with trying to use actual gold or silver to buy stuff. The vendor would have to be constantly adjusting the price to reflect the day's pricing whims. Very inefficient.
If the roads are busy, it just takes them longer that day to deliver all of the packages in their care. They don't return to the warehouse after each package, they load up and spend hours delivering their whole payload. They may do that twice a day. Depends on the local situation. This isn't pizza delivery, it's just like that UPS truck that has your package "out for delivery" in the morning, and may not appear until that evening. All of our Amazon-brand drivers and the private contractors who also do that work tell me they shove off in the morning with a couple hundred packages in their vans. And they're done when they're done.
What seems to be your problem? The GP implies that that specific turn of events (the Senate choosing not to proceed with Obama's last choice for SCOTUS) was "about the GOP." Conveniently pretending that that position on the GOP's part was hardly the first or only example. And you're pretending you can't follow the thread well enough to know that's the context. Stop pretending you're dumb just so you can sound like a scold. It's embarrassing.
Why would they not pay rent? They number of hours you spend during a rush week (11 vs. say, 8) doesn't change your income when you contract to do this sort of work. So why would it be harder to pay your rent when they're delivering peak loads of packages? Are you even listening to yourself?
the GOP-controlled senate said nope wait for Trump to take control.
So yes, it really is about the GOP.
Except for when it's about Democrats. Because in previous circumstances, the Democrats running the senate proposed blocking any Bush court appointees "so close to the end of his term" as well... except unlike the Scalia vacancy, the Dems said they considered a year and a half to be the threshold. Get over your hypocritical self.
It is a scandal that such a group can make such important decisions and that the congress is not taking action.
No, the scandal is that the FCC under Obama put an executive policy into place that was directly at odds with the specific wishes of congress. Undoing that Obama admin fiat is putting things back into line with the law. I suppose you were also complaining when NN was put into place, for the same reasons? No? Gotcha.
How do you figure? By all reports he's now essentially ruined by legal expenses. This wasn't a rich business guy who entered politics, this was a government salary guy.
Of course this has nothing to do with any actual merchandise (in the US, OR in the UK, which is what the article is about). Which you know, but are pretending you don't.
This is about last-mile delivery service, apparently a good deal of which is being done by contractors who sign up to complete the work at a fixed price without having the foresight to contemplate the nature of the seasonal traffic for a few weeks in December.
He regrets the fact that some of Amazon's delivery attempt windows during this busy season didn't line up with actual time-at-the-door. He regrets that Amazon's supported hardware doesn't yet interact well with some other systems/apps/devices he'd like to use to police his front door (like, he can't YET easily let his dog walker use an app to gain entrance unless that dog walker uses Amazon to cashier their dog walking service, etc).
To the contrary, he thinks Amazon did a good job with the way they limit access, record access, alert about access, and limit which drivers are allowed to even work under this scheme. Why the lying headline, slashdot? Never mind, we already know.
Really. So you think that the people who sneak across the border and are up for deportation because they've committed crimes are the ones that would be eligible for higher paying jobs in the sectors we're talking about?
Well, if you don't have the reading comprehension skills to see that they're talking especially about manufacturing jobs, then I suppose that might explain why your who notion of employment revolves around wearing a Walmart smock.
I went out of my way yesterday to buy Kaspersky AV since the US and EU decided to vilify them. Because screw 3 letter agencies.
So if a CIA or NSA tip led the FBI to your neighbor's house where the guy and his four roomates were running a bomb-making factory, and you saw them surrounding the house... you'd do your best to help out your terrorist neighbor because, you know, screw those three letter agencies?
See? Here's some source code to review. And, here's a compiled binary that we promise, really, only contains that code. And all of our recurring updates will only be the same code you reviewed. Promise.
Should the community college have to pay for fast-lane access?
Who said that? You did.
Dismantling NN isn't for the small network providers and doesn't benefit them. It's for the big ones who can afford to discriminate.
What? It's the handful of huge companies who WANT the current NN framework because they can handle the compliance impact while smaller businesses competing in the fringes where people who desperately need higher speed service cannot. Shilling for Obama's edict is you working for Comcast and Verizon.
In other words, throttling to contracted bandwidth can be done in a neutral manner just fine.
That's the problem. If you're neutral about it, then 95% of your bandwidth goes towards providing services for two or three huge corporate media companies - a recipe that an ISP offering the benefits of distance learning, telework, security systems and other uses may have a real need to manage "unfairly." There's nothing wrong with tamping down somebody's overnight TiVo "suggested viewing" download they didn't even ask for while someone else's physics class video gets priority.
Slashdot Mirror
ISPs are meant to deliver the internet. All of it.
Retailers sell goods from a selection of suppliers.
This is childish, incoherent nonsense.
No, a web server is meant to do whatever the person who bought it and provisioned it and is paying for the admin time, power, and bandwidth WANTS it to do. Just because you want to be able to tell other people what to do with their own money doesn't mean you get to.
but the WWW should also be neutral and servers should not discriminate against user agents
Why not? If I'm running a web server and don't have unlimited resources to pay for horsepower and bandwidth, why shouldn't I be able to tell my server to handle some requests differently than others if that suits me? I know why. Because you have no idea what it's like to actually pay for anything, but still want to tell other people how to run their lives.
Next month, "Help me, other tax payers who aren't idiots! My mortgage is now bigger than the market value of my house. Make a law that makes the bank put my mortgage back the way it was! It's not fair!"
If you are interested in conspiracies then you need look no further than our own President's election campaign.
Exactly. The fantasists who see conspiracies there are quite imaginative. Which is important if you're trying really hard to distract from the actual ones (which, happily, didn't return their intended results back in November).
And combine that with popular entertainment slipping images of flying saucers into people's brains, and you get the same effect that people experienced when it was OLDER popular entertainment filling their heads with angels or the like. Carl Sagan did a really good job of exploring that topic in "Demon Haunted World," which is still worth a read quite a few years after it was published.
Though not AS volatile, it's the same sort of problem that would come with trying to use actual gold or silver to buy stuff. The vendor would have to be constantly adjusting the price to reflect the day's pricing whims. Very inefficient.
If the roads are busy, it just takes them longer that day to deliver all of the packages in their care. They don't return to the warehouse after each package, they load up and spend hours delivering their whole payload. They may do that twice a day. Depends on the local situation. This isn't pizza delivery, it's just like that UPS truck that has your package "out for delivery" in the morning, and may not appear until that evening. All of our Amazon-brand drivers and the private contractors who also do that work tell me they shove off in the morning with a couple hundred packages in their vans. And they're done when they're done.
What seems to be your problem? The GP implies that that specific turn of events (the Senate choosing not to proceed with Obama's last choice for SCOTUS) was "about the GOP." Conveniently pretending that that position on the GOP's part was hardly the first or only example. And you're pretending you can't follow the thread well enough to know that's the context. Stop pretending you're dumb just so you can sound like a scold. It's embarrassing.
Why would they not pay rent? They number of hours you spend during a rush week (11 vs. say, 8) doesn't change your income when you contract to do this sort of work. So why would it be harder to pay your rent when they're delivering peak loads of packages? Are you even listening to yourself?
If they can't hire enough of them that are worth hiring, then, yes.
the GOP-controlled senate said nope wait for Trump to take control.
So yes, it really is about the GOP.
Except for when it's about Democrats. Because in previous circumstances, the Democrats running the senate proposed blocking any Bush court appointees "so close to the end of his term" as well ... except unlike the Scalia vacancy, the Dems said they considered a year and a half to be the threshold. Get over your hypocritical self.
It is a scandal that such a group can make such important decisions and that the congress is not taking action.
No, the scandal is that the FCC under Obama put an executive policy into place that was directly at odds with the specific wishes of congress. Undoing that Obama admin fiat is putting things back into line with the law. I suppose you were also complaining when NN was put into place, for the same reasons? No? Gotcha.
In that case it eliminates the comments as a prerequisite to satisfying the rules of the FCC changing their policy
No, it just eliminates the need to waste a bunch of time and tax dollars reporting on untold thousands of identical copy/paste spam comments.
but Mike Flynn can afford expensive lawyers
How do you figure? By all reports he's now essentially ruined by legal expenses. This wasn't a rich business guy who entered politics, this was a government salary guy.
Of course this has nothing to do with any actual merchandise (in the US, OR in the UK, which is what the article is about). Which you know, but are pretending you don't.
This is about last-mile delivery service, apparently a good deal of which is being done by contractors who sign up to complete the work at a fixed price without having the foresight to contemplate the nature of the seasonal traffic for a few weeks in December.
The writer himself mentioned that, not me.
No, THIS IS NOT WHAT THE REPORTER REGRETS.
He regrets the fact that some of Amazon's delivery attempt windows during this busy season didn't line up with actual time-at-the-door. He regrets that Amazon's supported hardware doesn't yet interact well with some other systems/apps/devices he'd like to use to police his front door (like, he can't YET easily let his dog walker use an app to gain entrance unless that dog walker uses Amazon to cashier their dog walking service, etc).
To the contrary, he thinks Amazon did a good job with the way they limit access, record access, alert about access, and limit which drivers are allowed to even work under this scheme. Why the lying headline, slashdot? Never mind, we already know.
Really. So you think that the people who sneak across the border and are up for deportation because they've committed crimes are the ones that would be eligible for higher paying jobs in the sectors we're talking about?
Well, if you don't have the reading comprehension skills to see that they're talking especially about manufacturing jobs, then I suppose that might explain why your who notion of employment revolves around wearing a Walmart smock.
I went out of my way yesterday to buy Kaspersky AV since the US and EU decided to vilify them. Because screw 3 letter agencies.
So if a CIA or NSA tip led the FBI to your neighbor's house where the guy and his four roomates were running a bomb-making factory, and you saw them surrounding the house ... you'd do your best to help out your terrorist neighbor because, you know, screw those three letter agencies?
See? Here's some source code to review. And, here's a compiled binary that we promise, really, only contains that code. And all of our recurring updates will only be the same code you reviewed. Promise.
Nice straw man argument there. You win! You totally won the debate that nobody is having. Way to go.
Should the community college have to pay for fast-lane access?
Who said that? You did.
Dismantling NN isn't for the small network providers and doesn't benefit them. It's for the big ones who can afford to discriminate.
What? It's the handful of huge companies who WANT the current NN framework because they can handle the compliance impact while smaller businesses competing in the fringes where people who desperately need higher speed service cannot. Shilling for Obama's edict is you working for Comcast and Verizon.
In other words, throttling to contracted bandwidth can be done in a neutral manner just fine.
That's the problem. If you're neutral about it, then 95% of your bandwidth goes towards providing services for two or three huge corporate media companies - a recipe that an ISP offering the benefits of distance learning, telework, security systems and other uses may have a real need to manage "unfairly." There's nothing wrong with tamping down somebody's overnight TiVo "suggested viewing" download they didn't even ask for while someone else's physics class video gets priority.