The second option is to re-record sound recordings in order to create new sound recording copyrights, which would reset the countdown clock at 35 years for copyright grant termination. Eveline characterized the labels’ conversations with creators going something like, “Okay, you have the old mono masters if you want — but these digital remasters are ours.”
Labels already file new copyrights for remasters. For example, Sony Music filed a new copyright for the remastered version of Ben Folds Five’s Whatever and Ever Amen album, and when Omega Record Group remastered a 1991 Christmas recording, the basis of its new copyright claim was “New Matter: sound recording remixed and remastered to fully utilize the sonic potential of the compact disc medium.”
You know damn well if you tried this yourself, the RIAA would be all over your ass
It's a good thing too. It's not like this jacked up rate will apply to me since I purchased my phone quite a few months ago and I have a contract with Verizon... It's not like they can just suddenly change that on me (yeah right.. every company does that shit all the time)
I'm just sick of the fact ALL carriers advertise a plan for $45, data for $30, $15 for texting and then tack on (in my case) an extra $26 and some change as Verizon Fees... which if you read the fine print is used for "improving the network, off-setting tax imposed by government, and paying the fees to local phone system operators". I'm sorry, but shouldn't that be what the god damn plan pays for?!
Basically, Verizon is charging me for the plan, the data, the texting, and also having ME pay their taxes due to the GOVERNMENT. Fuck off Verizon
As a side note, there was a lawsuit against AT&T about pro-rating the early term fee based on how long you've had the phone. Is Verizon going to implement this? You shouldn't be charged $350 at the 18th month to cancel the phone since the $350 is to cover what they subsidized on it. If you terminate at month 2, yes, but month 18? You only have another 4 months before you can do the new for two, and not get charged... so the fee should be reduced to ($350 / 24) * ((# months you had phone) - (may two months))
'That service is on our schedule for next year,' says Verizon spokeswoman Brenda Raney. The delay is because 'the service has to be tested on the phone so until we know it works, we don't offer the service. It is not uncommon for us to introduce the phone and continue to test the service and offer it later.'"
Yeah, just like they did with the Blackberry Storm. When my friend and I first got that phone about a year ago, it was the biggest pain in the behind phone I think I've ever used. A lot of the people I know who have the Storm also had the same feelings towards it. Slow, froze up all the time, things would "stick" on the screen, the touch screen keyboard absolutely blew, sometimes when you went into the camera you'd see what the camera sees on the screen but the touch screen function bar at the bottom of the screen to take the pic etc wouldn't be there, etc.
Most of this has *FINALLY* been fixed in the Blackberry OS 5.0, but with ALL the issues (phone automagically erasing my microSD card which really pissed me off) I will never get a phone until the kinks have been worked out. It's not worth paying the "first adopter" price just to find its full of bugs (think the iPhones).
Also, that extra money for the tethering is crazy. I never got why in the hell they charged in the first place! (besides the whole "because they can")
yes, but has it passed the Senate and the (as reported few) republicans who said they will block or stall the extra money? (Which has to be the dumbest thing I've ever heard.. leave the new car owners and dealerships hanging with a debt of $3500-$4500 per car sold.. that's helping the economy!)
The funny thing? I got curious and hit up www.toyota.co.uk and www.honda.co.uk... they both have diesel versions of most of their cars (Civic, some car models not offered here, Corolla, etc) that, as written on the site, get over 50 MPG (Yes, it said MPG, not KMPG so I'm not sure exactly how it's rated... but figuring VW diesels here get 50+ mpg it's about on par with one of those). The issue, we don't have them here and I'm willing to be one reason is the American view that diesel is a dirty nasty fuel...
Yeah, and the big issue is the dealerships/new owners may get screwed. There are a ton of cars yet the dealerships have to process via the CARS system. I guess it can take up to 3 hours per car to actually file the thing. The government ran out of money, and the dealerships still have many, many cars sold under the CARS program they are going to need to get CARS money for.
Problem is, the government is working at it's finest again. I'm not really for either party, so don't read this as me blaming one side or the other, it's just how it's been reported. The House has passed the extra $2 million, but it still has to hit the Senate. From reports, there's a few Republican Senators who are going to block the bill, or at least try to stall it long enough.
Why are they going to do this?? I don't have a clue. I understand they may not like the CARS issue, and maybe think it's a waste of money. But that raises a few points. One, it's helped save a lot of small car dealerships, at least for a time now. Two, the money that's been flowing around surely hasn't hurt the economy. Three, if the Senate shoots down the extra money, what's going to happen to the dealerships and new car owners who find out that even though their trade in + new purchase met the requirement of the program, the program ran out of money faster than anyone could believe so now the $3500 or $4500 per car is a no go? The dealership is basically stuck fronting the $3500 or $4500 until the government can get them the money as is. Without the extra influx of money to the CARS program, a *LOT* of dealerships may find themselves holding a *LOT* of $3500 or $4500 "discounts" that will take a struggling business market already and completely trash it.
Even if the dealerships went after the customer for the extra $3500 or $4500, a lot of them may not be able to afford the extra costs, or may have to sell the car off right away. While this may help the "new" used market segment, the customer is back to purchasing a cheaper, possibly less fuel efficient car to get around.
All in all, a confusing and maybe not completely thought out program, but with an even more poorly thought out Government Party "I'm not going to support it because it's another parties idea" possible blocking of money.
There's a big issue that's missed here... I have verizon and live in central PA (State College area). When you head out from town, cell coverage is next to non-existent. It's very hit and miss, you can send a text out in some spots, but not make or receive a call.
I've tried using the VZW Navigator app during the free trial on my BB Storm. I've tried using the garmin app for BB's free trial, and I've used Google Maps.
Garmin's app for the BB has the best feel overall, and can be integrated with Panoramio, which is neat. Google's works for finding places or people (Latitude), but doesn't do voice prompts. VZW Nav just looks like a cheap nav app and for the $10 a month, you'd be better off purchasing the Garmin app for $100.
Now here's the big issue... the BB GPS chip works apparently by talking to the cell tower. I've tried turning the feature to enhance the GPS location off, and things like Geotagging my photos won't work when I have little to no cell service, even if the GPS signal is strong. I purchased a cheap $30 16 channel Bluetooth GPS receiver, and when it's paired the GPS feature works with full or no cell service. I'm not sure how many other phones have this happen, and I'm not sure if there's a work around for the BB Storm, but from what I've seen the stand alone GPS units are still the way to go ($200 garmin) as some also work as a hands free device for those states that require that. But if I did have to use a GPS program on a cell phone, the phone better have a large screen, such as the Storm, and have a well laid-out and clean UI such as the Garmin app.. Nothing like the VZW Nav interface.
The sub-$10,000 transfers was a good way to help avoid attention... but imagine if the decimal place was off, and what should have been "fractions of a penny that get dropped off" and add up over many years becomes a couple hundred thousands or millions over the weekend!
it doesn't speed up the plane... but the plane is moving 150 mph compared to the air. That's air speed.
Let's reverse it.. A plane must travel so fast to stay in the air.. let's say 130mph to keep things sane. So if you have a plane flying at 140mph with no wind any direction, the plane will stay up. That same plane could slow to 125mph with a 15mph headwind, and still stay up since in effect the plane is "traveling" at 140mph. Now if there was a TAIL wind of 15mph while the plane was flying at 125mph, the effective speed of the plane would only be 110mph and it wouldn't be able to stay up, it would stall.
which is dumb... someone who lives outside the united state could very well download the strong crypto program or library legally (well legal for the person in the US hosting it), and maybe their country doesn't have the same export laws for crypto, and hosts it for a country that's a no-no from a US point of view
that's the way it's written in the FTA. I'm guessing the Rep said it as it's written.. incorrectly once and correctly the second time, not realizing they were in fact different amounts
Ran the same FF and Opera browser setup, and Opera beats the pants off of FF. Don't forget, FF has the worst of the Javascript performance both speed wise and the fact memory usage shoots above Opera and Chrome.
So they compare a Release Candidate vs "older browsers"?
Safari is at version 4 as a regular release, not sure about any beta's or RC's...
I'm using Chrome 2.0.172.31 right now to post this
Firefox is at 3.5 for a Beta (Or RC by now..)
Opera is at 10 for a Beta
They should have done apples to apples. When the IE8 RC was out, so was pre-releases of FF 3.5, Opera 10, as well as Safari and Chrome in more updated versions than they used.
I found this website which demo's the canvas tag in HTML 5. It's basically a small maze, with different textures on the walls.
You're able to change the texture settings to either Lower, Low, Medium, or High.
Working my way up with the settings, using the latest Firefox 3.5 beta, Opera 10 Beta, and Google Chrome (just a straight download, no beta if there is one).. and on my machine I found:
Google Chrome handles it the best. Even on highest, it moves just as well as Firefox on Lower (the lowest setting)
Firefox is slow on Medium, and majorly lags on Highest
Opera falls in the middle, alright on High, but has lag for sure
It's not quite the results I was expecting. Granted it's just one test on a very, very premature standard, but being the other two are beta releases showing off and fixing up the newest and greatest, I figured Opera would take the lead with Chrome and Firefox near each other. I didn't try Safari, but if anyone else has all the HTML 5 compatible browsers installed give it a shot and see what you get.
If anyone else knows any other HTML 5 semi-intense webpages that exist yet, or some way to compare how the browsers stack up with HTML 5 so far, please post as I'd be interested in checking it out
Hey! Welcome to the 21st Century and the development of the Internet! We now do not need to live anywhere near our place of employment to do work for said employer!
(PS: Yes, there are more tinfoil hat nuts than ever....)
With more R&D money, maybe Detroit would have been better prepared in the 70's and 80's for the crash of the big motored cars. The Asian makers were getting good MPG and still retaining useful horsepower compared to the Big 3. When forced into it, Detroit did step up, with the V8 motors that shut off 4 cylinders when not required, allowing a V8 truck to obtain 22+ MPG on the highway compared to the 13-16 they would otherwise have achieved.
Laugh all you want, but even the VTEC motors from Honda produce great Power to MPG ratios. Even on the older 2.2 Liter Prelude motors you could get the low end fuel efficiency, yet when needed the power band would provide 200 HP on a naturally aspirated motor able to spin up to 8000 RPM.
The other issue that's killing our ability to fund R&D is how anyone and everyone in the Senate slips unrelated and often uncalled for projects into any bill, be it related to the bill or not. If we could put an end to the pork barrel spending, I'm willing to bet we'd have a TON of money to put into areas that really could use it, or even put towards the national debt.
Better oversight, regulations, and maybe term limits on the Senate and Representatives such as those with the President would actually improve things. People become incumbents, get greedy and power hungry, and becoming the most known name get elected over and over again. It wouldn't hurt to limit the amount of time you're paid for having been a senator or representative to maybe twice the number of years you were in office (or match) wouldn't be a bad idea either....
or you get a real setup, run everything via the receiver so the audio/video sync stays correct, and use the receiver for up-conversion (if you're not using an expensive high end DVD player, the up-conversion in it sucks).
Then you just change the input on the AV Receiver and everything is good to go
True, but... how in the world would I then run into the issue of having to try to patch the new kernel with a wireless injection module developed for a kernel that's quite a few revisions back?!
That would just be too easy!
That's very true, but if Google only puts a brief quote from the article, enough to intrigue you, you'll click the link and head to the paper's web page.
Then they are now getting the revenue from all the ads they serve. Which with some papers I know (Centre Daily.Com (the worst) | Altoona Mirror) has got to be quite a bit of revenue!
"will require all internet service providers to retain a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/technologynews/5105"
If all the EU is requiring is for the ISP's to record 1 URL for a year... I mean I'm pretty sure you could save that into a read only text file and just let it sit around forever.
Like Ron Popeil says, "Set it, and forget it!"
I understand why the government may have wanted to protect the markets in a sense... if someone came in and undercut the existing Tele/Cable co, took over the market and then jacked prices up or went bankrupt, things would be worse off. But that's no excuse to allow the existing company to essentially do the same thing with jacking prices up and locking out the market.
All the investors will bitching about the Socialism aspect of the bailouts, and wha wha wha, but where is all the bitching and government action of the basically Socialized Tele/Cable incumbents?
I say let the free markets work like they are intended to. Open the markets and allow others to compete, and may the best company win. If Verizon, ATT, etc fail, well too bad. I guess they weren't the best option in the public's eye.
It's no different than the government giving Denny's a monopolistic area where they are the only Restaurant and have full control over the supply lines of food.
You want to open a Eat N Park, Perkin's, etc? First off, good luck getting past the legal blocks.
Oh, you successfully managed to get one location open?
Good for you, too bad we own the food supply lines, and we're not going to allow you to get any.
Oh so the government finally forced us to open
the food supply from our grimy clutched fists?
Fine, we'll just up your costs to the point where you either won't be able to afford it, or the cost will be so great you'll have to make your customers pay too much for your service so we still win!
Slashdot Mirror
The second option is to re-record sound recordings in order to create new sound recording copyrights, which would reset the countdown clock at 35 years for copyright grant termination. Eveline characterized the labels’ conversations with creators going something like, “Okay, you have the old mono masters if you want — but these digital remasters are ours.”
Labels already file new copyrights for remasters. For example, Sony Music filed a new copyright for the remastered version of Ben Folds Five’s Whatever and Ever Amen album, and when Omega Record Group remastered a 1991 Christmas recording, the basis of its new copyright claim was “New Matter: sound recording remixed and remastered to fully utilize the sonic potential of the compact disc medium.”
You know damn well if you tried this yourself, the RIAA would be all over your ass
You don't have to look too far:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Serpico
There's also a film named Serpico made in 1973 with Al Pacino playing his part.
It's a good thing too. It's not like this jacked up rate will apply to me since I purchased my phone quite a few months ago and I have a contract with Verizon... It's not like they can just suddenly change that on me (yeah right.. every company does that shit all the time)
I'm just sick of the fact ALL carriers advertise a plan for $45, data for $30, $15 for texting and then tack on (in my case) an extra $26 and some change as Verizon Fees... which if you read the fine print is used for "improving the network, off-setting tax imposed by government, and paying the fees to local phone system operators". I'm sorry, but shouldn't that be what the god damn plan pays for?!
Basically, Verizon is charging me for the plan, the data, the texting, and also having ME pay their taxes due to the GOVERNMENT. Fuck off Verizon
As a side note, there was a lawsuit against AT&T about pro-rating the early term fee based on how long you've had the phone. Is Verizon going to implement this? You shouldn't be charged $350 at the 18th month to cancel the phone since the $350 is to cover what they subsidized on it. If you terminate at month 2, yes, but month 18? You only have another 4 months before you can do the new for two, and not get charged... so the fee should be reduced to ($350 / 24) * ((# months you had phone) - (may two months))
'That service is on our schedule for next year,' says Verizon spokeswoman Brenda Raney. The delay is because 'the service has to be tested on the phone so until we know it works, we don't offer the service. It is not uncommon for us to introduce the phone and continue to test the service and offer it later.'"
Yeah, just like they did with the Blackberry Storm. When my friend and I first got that phone about a year ago, it was the biggest pain in the behind phone I think I've ever used. A lot of the people I know who have the Storm also had the same feelings towards it. Slow, froze up all the time, things would "stick" on the screen, the touch screen keyboard absolutely blew, sometimes when you went into the camera you'd see what the camera sees on the screen but the touch screen function bar at the bottom of the screen to take the pic etc wouldn't be there, etc.
Most of this has *FINALLY* been fixed in the Blackberry OS 5.0, but with ALL the issues (phone automagically erasing my microSD card which really pissed me off) I will never get a phone until the kinks have been worked out. It's not worth paying the "first adopter" price just to find its full of bugs (think the iPhones).
Also, that extra money for the tethering is crazy. I never got why in the hell they charged in the first place! (besides the whole "because they can")
err and forgot to mention, it's like Linux Distro's (which btw, linux does have different kernels available, RT's, VM's, regular x86, regular x64
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Unix_history-simple.en.svg
yes, but has it passed the Senate and the (as reported few) republicans who said they will block or stall the extra money? (Which has to be the dumbest thing I've ever heard.. leave the new car owners and dealerships hanging with a debt of $3500-$4500 per car sold.. that's helping the economy!)
The funny thing? I got curious and hit up www.toyota.co.uk and www.honda.co.uk... they both have diesel versions of most of their cars (Civic, some car models not offered here, Corolla, etc) that, as written on the site, get over 50 MPG (Yes, it said MPG, not KMPG so I'm not sure exactly how it's rated... but figuring VW diesels here get 50+ mpg it's about on par with one of those). The issue, we don't have them here and I'm willing to be one reason is the American view that diesel is a dirty nasty fuel...
Yeah, and the big issue is the dealerships/new owners may get screwed. There are a ton of cars yet the dealerships have to process via the CARS system. I guess it can take up to 3 hours per car to actually file the thing. The government ran out of money, and the dealerships still have many, many cars sold under the CARS program they are going to need to get CARS money for.
Problem is, the government is working at it's finest again. I'm not really for either party, so don't read this as me blaming one side or the other, it's just how it's been reported. The House has passed the extra $2 million, but it still has to hit the Senate. From reports, there's a few Republican Senators who are going to block the bill, or at least try to stall it long enough.
Why are they going to do this?? I don't have a clue. I understand they may not like the CARS issue, and maybe think it's a waste of money. But that raises a few points. One, it's helped save a lot of small car dealerships, at least for a time now. Two, the money that's been flowing around surely hasn't hurt the economy. Three, if the Senate shoots down the extra money, what's going to happen to the dealerships and new car owners who find out that even though their trade in + new purchase met the requirement of the program, the program ran out of money faster than anyone could believe so now the $3500 or $4500 per car is a no go? The dealership is basically stuck fronting the $3500 or $4500 until the government can get them the money as is. Without the extra influx of money to the CARS program, a *LOT* of dealerships may find themselves holding a *LOT* of $3500 or $4500 "discounts" that will take a struggling business market already and completely trash it.
Even if the dealerships went after the customer for the extra $3500 or $4500, a lot of them may not be able to afford the extra costs, or may have to sell the car off right away. While this may help the "new" used market segment, the customer is back to purchasing a cheaper, possibly less fuel efficient car to get around.
All in all, a confusing and maybe not completely thought out program, but with an even more poorly thought out Government Party "I'm not going to support it because it's another parties idea" possible blocking of money.
I've tried using the VZW Navigator app during the free trial on my BB Storm. I've tried using the garmin app for BB's free trial, and I've used Google Maps.
Garmin's app for the BB has the best feel overall, and can be integrated with Panoramio, which is neat. Google's works for finding places or people (Latitude), but doesn't do voice prompts. VZW Nav just looks like a cheap nav app and for the $10 a month, you'd be better off purchasing the Garmin app for $100.
Now here's the big issue... the BB GPS chip works apparently by talking to the cell tower. I've tried turning the feature to enhance the GPS location off, and things like Geotagging my photos won't work when I have little to no cell service, even if the GPS signal is strong. I purchased a cheap $30 16 channel Bluetooth GPS receiver, and when it's paired the GPS feature works with full or no cell service. I'm not sure how many other phones have this happen, and I'm not sure if there's a work around for the BB Storm, but from what I've seen the stand alone GPS units are still the way to go ($200 garmin) as some also work as a hands free device for those states that require that. But if I did have to use a GPS program on a cell phone, the phone better have a large screen, such as the Storm, and have a well laid-out and clean UI such as the Garmin app.. Nothing like the VZW Nav interface.
The sub-$10,000 transfers was a good way to help avoid attention... but imagine if the decimal place was off, and what should have been "fractions of a penny that get dropped off" and add up over many years becomes a couple hundred thousands or millions over the weekend!
it doesn't speed up the plane... but the plane is moving 150 mph compared to the air. That's air speed.
Let's reverse it.. A plane must travel so fast to stay in the air.. let's say 130mph to keep things sane. So if you have a plane flying at 140mph with no wind any direction, the plane will stay up. That same plane could slow to 125mph with a 15mph headwind, and still stay up since in effect the plane is "traveling" at 140mph. Now if there was a TAIL wind of 15mph while the plane was flying at 125mph, the effective speed of the plane would only be 110mph and it wouldn't be able to stay up, it would stall.
which is dumb... someone who lives outside the united state could very well download the strong crypto program or library legally (well legal for the person in the US hosting it), and maybe their country doesn't have the same export laws for crypto, and hosts it for a country that's a no-no from a US point of view
that's the way it's written in the FTA. I'm guessing the Rep said it as it's written.. incorrectly once and correctly the second time, not realizing they were in fact different amounts
Ran the same FF and Opera browser setup, and Opera beats the pants off of FF. Don't forget, FF has the worst of the Javascript performance both speed wise and the fact memory usage shoots above Opera and Chrome.
Apple Safari v3
Google Chrome 1.0.154
Microsoft Internet Explorer v8 (RC1)
Microsoft Internet Explorer v7
Mozilla Firefox v3.07
Opera 9.64
So they compare a Release Candidate vs "older browsers"?
Safari is at version 4 as a regular release, not sure about any beta's or RC's...
I'm using Chrome 2.0.172.31 right now to post this
Firefox is at 3.5 for a Beta (Or RC by now..)
Opera is at 10 for a Beta
They should have done apples to apples. When the IE8 RC was out, so was pre-releases of FF 3.5, Opera 10, as well as Safari and Chrome in more updated versions than they used.
I found this website which demo's the canvas tag in HTML 5. It's basically a small maze, with different textures on the walls.
You're able to change the texture settings to either Lower, Low, Medium, or High.
Working my way up with the settings, using the latest Firefox 3.5 beta, Opera 10 Beta, and Google Chrome (just a straight download, no beta if there is one).. and on my machine I found:
It's not quite the results I was expecting. Granted it's just one test on a very, very premature standard, but being the other two are beta releases showing off and fixing up the newest and greatest, I figured Opera would take the lead with Chrome and Firefox near each other. I didn't try Safari, but if anyone else has all the HTML 5 compatible browsers installed give it a shot and see what you get.
If anyone else knows any other HTML 5 semi-intense webpages that exist yet, or some way to compare how the browsers stack up with HTML 5 so far, please post as I'd be interested in checking it out
Hey! Welcome to the 21st Century and the development of the Internet! We now do not need to live anywhere near our place of employment to do work for said employer!
(PS: Yes, there are more tinfoil hat nuts than ever....)
I agree.
With more R&D money, maybe Detroit would have been better prepared in the 70's and 80's for the crash of the big motored cars. The Asian makers were getting good MPG and still retaining useful horsepower compared to the Big 3. When forced into it, Detroit did step up, with the V8 motors that shut off 4 cylinders when not required, allowing a V8 truck to obtain 22+ MPG on the highway compared to the 13-16 they would otherwise have achieved.
Laugh all you want, but even the VTEC motors from Honda produce great Power to MPG ratios. Even on the older 2.2 Liter Prelude motors you could get the low end fuel efficiency, yet when needed the power band would provide 200 HP on a naturally aspirated motor able to spin up to 8000 RPM.
The other issue that's killing our ability to fund R&D is how anyone and everyone in the Senate slips unrelated and often uncalled for projects into any bill, be it related to the bill or not. If we could put an end to the pork barrel spending, I'm willing to bet we'd have a TON of money to put into areas that really could use it, or even put towards the national debt.
Better oversight, regulations, and maybe term limits on the Senate and Representatives such as those with the President would actually improve things. People become incumbents, get greedy and power hungry, and becoming the most known name get elected over and over again. It wouldn't hurt to limit the amount of time you're paid for having been a senator or representative to maybe twice the number of years you were in office (or match) wouldn't be a bad idea either....
Ok, so make it a non-profit. Then what? I hate when companies bitch. It's the tax payers deciding what do to with THEIR MONEY.. end of story to me.
or you get a real setup, run everything via the receiver so the audio/video sync stays correct, and use the receiver for up-conversion (if you're not using an expensive high end DVD player, the up-conversion in it sucks). Then you just change the input on the AV Receiver and everything is good to go
True, but... how in the world would I then run into the issue of having to try to patch the new kernel with a wireless injection module developed for a kernel that's quite a few revisions back?!
That would just be too easy!
That's very true, but if Google only puts a brief quote from the article, enough to intrigue you, you'll click the link and head to the paper's web page.
Then they are now getting the revenue from all the ads they serve. Which with some papers I know (Centre Daily.Com (the worst) | Altoona Mirror) has got to be quite a bit of revenue!
"will require all internet service providers to retain a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/technologynews/5105"
If all the EU is requiring is for the ISP's to record 1 URL for a year... I mean I'm pretty sure you could save that into a read only text file and just let it sit around forever.
Like Ron Popeil says, "Set it, and forget it!"
I understand why the government may have wanted to protect the markets in a sense... if someone came in and undercut the existing Tele/Cable co, took over the market and then jacked prices up or went bankrupt, things would be worse off. But that's no excuse to allow the existing company to essentially do the same thing with jacking prices up and locking out the market.
All the investors will bitching about the Socialism aspect of the bailouts, and wha wha wha, but where is all the bitching and government action of the basically Socialized Tele/Cable incumbents?
I say let the free markets work like they are intended to. Open the markets and allow others to compete, and may the best company win. If Verizon, ATT, etc fail, well too bad. I guess they weren't the best option in the public's eye.
It's no different than the government giving Denny's a monopolistic area where they are the only Restaurant and have full control over the supply lines of food.
You want to open a Eat N Park, Perkin's, etc?
First off, good luck getting past the legal blocks.
Oh, you successfully managed to get one location open?
Good for you, too bad we own the food supply lines, and we're not going to allow you to get any.
Oh so the government finally forced us to open the food supply from our grimy clutched fists?
Fine, we'll just up your costs to the point where you either won't be able to afford it, or the cost will be so great you'll have to make your customers pay too much for your service so we still win!