i can see it now... millions of children sulking at birthday parties, lifeless balloons trailing behind them on the ground--like so many ball and chains.
investing in infrastructure isn't "mad crazy spending."
communications networks are already heavily subsidized, at least this will ensure that such investment is providing adequate returns. if a particular provider is not providing return value on this public investment, then they should not continue to be subsidized. likewise, these reports will allow statewide grants to be used more efficiently/effectively by focusing attention and resources on areas that are lagging behind in broadband infrastructure.
the ideal solution for this type of infrastructure is to nationalize it, but create a decentralized structure similar to the Department of Education. funding and general development goals/initiatives are set by federal and state level government, but each area's ISP and local infrastructure (like municipal wi-fi) should be managed by municipal governments.
subsidizing commercial corporations doesn't give the public any control over the management of vital public infrastructure. this has been demonstrated with the telecoms, and again with ISPs. we pay for the infrastructure, but they still charge us extortionate prices made possible by their natural monopoly.
with public utilities, which are always natural monopolies, the only ways to protect public interest is through industry regulation or have the government provide the utility. but with a pro-business government that is constantly pushing for industry deregulation, subsidizing private industries is not a viable option. so the only real way to establish a communications infrastructure which serves public interest rather than corporate interests, is to nationalize our communications infrastructure and provide broadband access through locally-managed municipal wi-fi.
well, i meant checking logical consistency within a particular mathematical system, not across different theories. i don't see why the wiki couldn't keep different systems separate. calculus theorems don't have any relevance to axioms of set theory, and vice versa.
what about other remotely stored data like contact lists? and webmail isn't the only application for cloud-computing.
i don't think there's anything inherently wrong with using cloud services per se, but it would be unwise to become over-reliant on them, especially for important/valuable or sensitive info. i mean, using cloud services to share data and for backup probably isn't what RMS is warning against.
one thing i like about Gmail and Google in general is their stance that it's the user's data, and they should be free to take it wherever they want, whenever they want. this attitude has ensured that Gmail, and other google service, users are given the option to export their stored data in an open format that can be easily imported by desktop applications or other web services.
so if Google goes out of business or they decide to charge for their end user services, i can take my data somewhere else. this gives me confidence that Google will protect user interests, and provides a form of insurance against service changes in the future.
but if a company like Thompson Reuters decided to offer a web service, i would not trust them with my data. their litigation against GMU has demonstrated that they are willing to lock users into their proprietary format. so if you were using an online collaboration tool developed by Thompson Reuters, and you wanted to take your project to another service or migrate to a desktop application, you probably wouldn't be allowed to export your data from their cloud service.
then there is the privacy issue. look at what Yahoo, and even Google, have done in the past to help the Chinese government root out political dissidents. look at how the telecoms have illegally encroached on customer privacy. can you honestly say that a world in which cloud-computing has replaced desktop applications is not something to worry about?
he didn't dismiss cloud computer, he warned against it. it's precisely because he sees the growing trend towards cloud-computing that he has voiced his disapproval of it.
personally, i see cloud-computing as a valuable tool if used properly, but the public needs to be careful about their growing dependence on commercial internet services for their data storage.
there's already an established anti-consumer trend of creating unreasonable, one-sided software EULAs for desktop applications. however, there is legal ambiguity here as to the legitimacy of shrink-wrap/click-wrap licenses. there's little legal basis for binding individuals to non-negotiable legal contracts which are not made viewable to the user until they've already purchased the software.
however, with Software as a Service, the terms of service have much more legal weight. this is understandable for social networking sites like facebook where the usefulness of the site relies on their being able to organize, manipulate, perform, and reproduce things like user profiles, comments, messages, etc. so in order to protect themselves from litigation against their core services, certain user rights need to be waived in the user agreement.
however, with services like webmail there's little need for the service provider to publish user data. but similar copyright waivers can still be injected into the ToS agreement. likewise, if you store all of your work e-mails, contact lists, etc. on a proprietary system, and they decide to lock you into their service by providing no way for you to export your personal data, or by injecting a clause into the ToS that forbids users from taking their data to another service provider, then you may be stuck with that service forever, unless you want to abandon all of your stored data.
this is a very dangerous situation that we are venturing into. and i think it would be wise to heed RMS' warning though he demonstrated a slight over-reaction. although the situation is not as dire at the moment, his fears are not completely groundless.
yea, an axiomatic system doesn't have to be complete to be useful. most logical systems we use are incomplete, but their logical consistence still makes them incredibly useful in science, engineering, and even mathematical research. this Wiki won't make mathematical systems complete, but it can still help discover new theorems--and check to see that existing theorems are all logically consistent with each other.
i mean, if you are working with boolean logic you accept that its fundamental axioms are true. that is simply given when you work with this formal system. its fundamental axioms are not absolutely provable, only provably consistent with one another. but that alone is enough for us to derive great theoretical and practical use from boolean logic--enough for us to be talking to each other over thousands of miles via digital signals processed by complex logic machines.
yes, perhaps being an astronaut _is_ cooler than being a legendary game developer (depends on how legendary, really), but being the son of an astronaut is not more noteworthy than actually being the developer of Ultima.
it's rather insulting to refer to someone by their relations when they've already made a name for themselves based on their own merits.
the proper analogy would be a courier stealing your discs and ransoming it for $20. a simple DVD copy doesn't have DRM restrictions which cost extra to bypass. RealNetworks is adding DRM to the copies for the sole purpose of charging users for extra licenses to have access to their now DRM-restricted data.
you're right that copyright owners are within their rights to restrict access to back-up content, but this lawsuit between the film industry/MPAA & RealNetworks shows that RealNetworks wasn't representing the interests of filmmakers. they didn't have an agreement with the MPAA to make RealNetworks the intermediary for the actual copyright holders.
if copy a Pixar DVD with Nero, Nero does not become the copyright holder for the DVD nor the copy. similarly, if i copy a DVD with Real's DVD copy program, Real has no right to impose DRM restrictions that force me to pay Real for additional licenses to play the media on other computers. if Real had negotiated a deal whereby the $20 playback fee went to the filmmakers, then they would have ethical grounds to make such claims, but this lawsuit shows they were just trying to line their pockets by putting DRM on other people's copyrighted works.
well, i don't know much about TV show production, but i know that with music, the biggest obstacle for indie artists is finding distribution. it doesn't matter how good your music is if you can't reach an audience and no one hears it. traditionally, the major labels, radio stations, and local promoters formed an industry-wide cartel that controlled which artists would succeed and which would fail. despite the public scandal surrounding it in the 1960's, payola is alive and well today. (Dexter Holland of the Offspring ostensibly fell out with Epitaph, i believe, over the recoupable costs of 3rd party promoters for keeping their "Come Out and Play" single on the radio, which is essentially modern payola.)
but these days, indie artists can often market and distribute their music themselves over the internet, thus bypassing the music cartels. if filmmakers can do the same, then you wouldn't need the backing of a major television network to reach audiences. right now it just seems like the major networks produce all of the good shows because their shows are all that we get to see. but smaller independent studios may start funding & producing their own serial programs if there were a way for them to get it to the public without being picked up by a major network.
good point. advertised speed increases are meaningless when those are burst speeds which are never obtained in real life.
as the parent adroitly pointed out, the fact that they cap each subscriber's monthly transfer rate at 250GB means that their network capacity is actually only 800kbps. they're just overselling more than ever.
i live in the suburbs of L.A. but my broadband bills are still several times those of similarly dense population centers in other countries.
if you were talking about Australia or Canada, where they have large sparsely populated wilderness and rural communities then that might be a fair excuse. (Canada actually has cheaper broadband than the U.S. in spite of this.) but most Americans live in metropolitan areas or their surrounding suburbs. a relatively small percentage of the population actually lives in places like Wisconsin or rural America.
check out this chart of average broadband speeds to see how far ahead Japan and Korea are. if we want to catch up to those countries, then we need expand infrastructure to meet demand, rather than artificially manipulate demand by putting tight restrictions on consumer broadband usage.
Re:If only all companies had this vision
on
Roku To Go Open Source
·
· Score: 3, Informative
TV is already becoming an anachronism when almost everyone has broadband internet access through which they can receive on-demand content uncontrolled by the major television networks. now all that needs to be done is for a legal and user-friendly solutions to be developed.
Miro (formerly known as Democracy Player) is one service that directly connects content-producers with end users without going through traditional distribution channels. thus television networks are no longer the gatekeepers of media distribution.
well, i guess that's a little better. but still, why should i have to pay RealNetworks for the right to play my DVD rips/backups on other computers? i can understand if they want to charge me for additional licenses for the DVD-burning application, but charging for access to my own backup data via DRM? who's digital rights are they managing here? certainly not theirs since they do not own the copyright on the DVDs being copied?
i wasn't referring to the price of the software, i was referring to the additional fees charged for each DVD you burn if you want to play it on multiple computers.
from the/. summary:
the program does have significant limitations: the DVDs it makes will only be playable on the computer where they were created; or, users can pay $20 per computer to play the DVDs on up to five additional computers.
does RealNetworks' DVD copying software _charge users $20_ for burning DVDs playable on multiple computers (still limited to a maximum of 5)?
how can they purport to be a champion of consumer rights/fair use when they're charging users to burn copies of their own DVDs and restricting users from playing these copies from more than 5 computers?
and who exactly are users paying the $20 to for being able to play their copies on more than one computer if not the MPAA or film makers? they actually have the galls to charge users for an additional license fee on works that they don't hold the rights to, and then they're turning around and saying that they're defending fair use rights? what a load of BS.
consumers should be allowed to make backups of their purchases without DRM and usage restrictions. they shouldn't have to pay for the right to make DVD copies that are playable on multiple computers, much less pay RealNetworks for that right.
you mean not everything bad that happens is a communist plot?
on a more interesting note, TFA states that yahoo has refused to cooperate with law-enforcement on this case on "privacy grounds." but didn't they hand over the user info on several Chinese dissidents, which led to an American national being falsely imprisoned?
i guess Yahoo will protect a user's privacy as long as they're a malicious criminal, but not if they're a prisoner of conscience. i guess it's time for me to close up my Yahoo! mail account for good.
well, a true communist society has yet to be realized on a large scale (though many communes operate under the same principles).
the problem is, the leap from capitalism to communism is a huge jump. Marx incorrectly assumed that such drastic cultural changes could be effected in a short time through violent revolution. but true communism is contingent on the existence of a democratic government--otherwise you cannot have a communally administered government that truly serves the will of the proletariat.
since the democratic will of the people reflects the society's culture, a capitalist society cannot be democratically converted to communism in a short period of time. so Leninism and Stalinism were adopted to force communism onto the people. but this undermines the fundamental ideals of an egalitarian utopia with the establishment of a military dictatorship.
neo-Marxist philosophers like Antonio Gramsci attempted to address the problems of Marxism, such as its failed eschatology which predicted popular proletariat uprisings in all capitalist societies, which would have avoided the need to establish faux communist regimes through military dictatorship. Gramsci expounded the pivotal idea of cultural hegemony. this was the missing piece of the picture that Marx and other early communists failed to take into account.
thus neo-Marxists address the issue of class struggle/warfare in more modern sociological terms. if you want to realize a communistic society, it has to be a gradual voluntary change achieved through cultural progress rather than military coercion. and this is much more likely to occur as people become more educated, which naturally creates a more progressive culture. social progress is a slow uphill battle against rearguard reactions, but slowly reforms are being made. most developed nations already have public education, universal health care, social welfare programs, etc.
progress always happens much quicker in smaller communities though. this is partly because democracy is diluted as population size grows and the social & political structure becomes more hierarchical. direct democracy doesn't exist in the U.S. beyond the state level, and participatory government is practically non-existent at the federal level. so as the result of the U.S.'s large geographic area and population size, we're a lot more reactionary than most developed nations.
my computer is probably worth less than $1000 at this point (it's a 4~5-year-old Dell). but i have a lot of data on it that is irreplaceable:
my artwork
photos
music collection
videos/movies
ebooks
my web & graphic design portfolio
source code from all the programs i've written over the years
personal documents
a few months ago i lost all of my CDs and DVDs when my ex moved into a new house, so what's backed up on my computer is all that i have left of my music & video collections. i also take lots of notes on my computer and keep contact info, reading lists, and similar lists for films/music/anime that i plan to check out in text documents on my desktop. these lists, like my music and video collection, have taken me years to compile. they have little value to other people, but i would be devastated if i lost this data, even if i was given a much better $3000 computer as a replacement.
hrmm... so is the phone service basically just VoIP over WiMAX? if so, then i see a lot of other cities following in Madison's footsteps.
it makes perfect sense to merge specialized communications networks, such as telecommunication, with internet access. nowadays an internet connection is just as important as a phone line, and you can transfer digital audio/video/text and any other data over the internet. so a dedicated telecommunications line is just redundant.
and when municipal Wi-Fi/WiMAX becomes as standard as roads/power lines, then we'll start seeing Wi-Fi/WiMAX mobile phones. we'll probably first see hybrid carrier-neutral wireless handsets, which can use Wi-Fi connections when available, but will default to cellular carriers if an open Wi-Fi network can't be found. and as slow adopters finally catch up to cities like SF, Madison, etc. and Wi-Fi coverage becomes ubiquitous, then more people will start using pure wireless VoIP handsets.
well, the success of this test shows that orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing can be used to implement wireless last-mile broadband.
the fact that this is a less-mature technology (was deployed before the WiMAX standard was finalized, so it is likely using an old draft of the WiMAX standard) means that we might be able to expect better performance from the official WiMAX protocol.
if anything, this test shows how WiMAX will perform under real-life conditions involving steel buildings, electronic noise, and moving network nodes. so far the results are positive.
if the current WiMAX standard has solved the problem with non-stationary network nodes, then it would surpass 3G cellular data networks in all ways, especially pricing.
IIRC Verizon Online also did this for a while. i was really upset when instead of a DNS error my browser automatically went to Verizon's (ad supported) search portal. i think i either changed the DNS setting on my router or it just went away. but in any case, i haven't seen it happen in a long time.
it's absolute BS that ISPs think they can just hijack the users' DNS error page. they already make money from subscription fees, but now they're hijacking subscribers' DNS errors to get ad views/clicks? not only is this unethical, but it undermines the HTTP protocol and screws with applications that require correct server responses.
this kind of abuse of power is exactly why we need communications infrastructure reform.
Slashdot Mirror
no, no, no--it's called the C-hash programming language. everyone knows that.
how the hell is this flamebait? the moderator needs to get a sense of humor (or learn what flamebait is).
i can see it now... millions of children sulking at birthday parties, lifeless balloons trailing behind them on the ground--like so many ball and chains.
will somebody please thing of the children?
investing in infrastructure isn't "mad crazy spending."
communications networks are already heavily subsidized, at least this will ensure that such investment is providing adequate returns. if a particular provider is not providing return value on this public investment, then they should not continue to be subsidized. likewise, these reports will allow statewide grants to be used more efficiently/effectively by focusing attention and resources on areas that are lagging behind in broadband infrastructure.
the ideal solution for this type of infrastructure is to nationalize it, but create a decentralized structure similar to the Department of Education. funding and general development goals/initiatives are set by federal and state level government, but each area's ISP and local infrastructure (like municipal wi-fi) should be managed by municipal governments.
subsidizing commercial corporations doesn't give the public any control over the management of vital public infrastructure. this has been demonstrated with the telecoms, and again with ISPs. we pay for the infrastructure, but they still charge us extortionate prices made possible by their natural monopoly.
with public utilities, which are always natural monopolies, the only ways to protect public interest is through industry regulation or have the government provide the utility. but with a pro-business government that is constantly pushing for industry deregulation, subsidizing private industries is not a viable option. so the only real way to establish a communications infrastructure which serves public interest rather than corporate interests, is to nationalize our communications infrastructure and provide broadband access through locally-managed municipal wi-fi.
well, i meant checking logical consistency within a particular mathematical system, not across different theories. i don't see why the wiki couldn't keep different systems separate. calculus theorems don't have any relevance to axioms of set theory, and vice versa.
what about other remotely stored data like contact lists? and webmail isn't the only application for cloud-computing.
i don't think there's anything inherently wrong with using cloud services per se, but it would be unwise to become over-reliant on them, especially for important/valuable or sensitive info. i mean, using cloud services to share data and for backup probably isn't what RMS is warning against.
one thing i like about Gmail and Google in general is their stance that it's the user's data, and they should be free to take it wherever they want, whenever they want. this attitude has ensured that Gmail, and other google service, users are given the option to export their stored data in an open format that can be easily imported by desktop applications or other web services.
so if Google goes out of business or they decide to charge for their end user services, i can take my data somewhere else. this gives me confidence that Google will protect user interests, and provides a form of insurance against service changes in the future.
but if a company like Thompson Reuters decided to offer a web service, i would not trust them with my data. their litigation against GMU has demonstrated that they are willing to lock users into their proprietary format. so if you were using an online collaboration tool developed by Thompson Reuters, and you wanted to take your project to another service or migrate to a desktop application, you probably wouldn't be allowed to export your data from their cloud service.
then there is the privacy issue. look at what Yahoo, and even Google, have done in the past to help the Chinese government root out political dissidents. look at how the telecoms have illegally encroached on customer privacy. can you honestly say that a world in which cloud-computing has replaced desktop applications is not something to worry about?
he didn't dismiss cloud computer, he warned against it. it's precisely because he sees the growing trend towards cloud-computing that he has voiced his disapproval of it.
personally, i see cloud-computing as a valuable tool if used properly, but the public needs to be careful about their growing dependence on commercial internet services for their data storage.
there's already an established anti-consumer trend of creating unreasonable, one-sided software EULAs for desktop applications. however, there is legal ambiguity here as to the legitimacy of shrink-wrap/click-wrap licenses. there's little legal basis for binding individuals to non-negotiable legal contracts which are not made viewable to the user until they've already purchased the software.
however, with Software as a Service, the terms of service have much more legal weight. this is understandable for social networking sites like facebook where the usefulness of the site relies on their being able to organize, manipulate, perform, and reproduce things like user profiles, comments, messages, etc. so in order to protect themselves from litigation against their core services, certain user rights need to be waived in the user agreement.
however, with services like webmail there's little need for the service provider to publish user data. but similar copyright waivers can still be injected into the ToS agreement. likewise, if you store all of your work e-mails, contact lists, etc. on a proprietary system, and they decide to lock you into their service by providing no way for you to export your personal data, or by injecting a clause into the ToS that forbids users from taking their data to another service provider, then you may be stuck with that service forever, unless you want to abandon all of your stored data.
this is a very dangerous situation that we are venturing into. and i think it would be wise to heed RMS' warning though he demonstrated a slight over-reaction. although the situation is not as dire at the moment, his fears are not completely groundless.
yea, an axiomatic system doesn't have to be complete to be useful. most logical systems we use are incomplete, but their logical consistence still makes them incredibly useful in science, engineering, and even mathematical research. this Wiki won't make mathematical systems complete, but it can still help discover new theorems--and check to see that existing theorems are all logically consistent with each other.
i mean, if you are working with boolean logic you accept that its fundamental axioms are true. that is simply given when you work with this formal system. its fundamental axioms are not absolutely provable, only provably consistent with one another. but that alone is enough for us to derive great theoretical and practical use from boolean logic--enough for us to be talking to each other over thousands of miles via digital signals processed by complex logic machines.
yes, perhaps being an astronaut _is_ cooler than being a legendary game developer (depends on how legendary, really), but being the son of an astronaut is not more noteworthy than actually being the developer of Ultima.
it's rather insulting to refer to someone by their relations when they've already made a name for themselves based on their own merits.
the proper analogy would be a courier stealing your discs and ransoming it for $20. a simple DVD copy doesn't have DRM restrictions which cost extra to bypass. RealNetworks is adding DRM to the copies for the sole purpose of charging users for extra licenses to have access to their now DRM-restricted data.
you're right that copyright owners are within their rights to restrict access to back-up content, but this lawsuit between the film industry/MPAA & RealNetworks shows that RealNetworks wasn't representing the interests of filmmakers. they didn't have an agreement with the MPAA to make RealNetworks the intermediary for the actual copyright holders.
if copy a Pixar DVD with Nero, Nero does not become the copyright holder for the DVD nor the copy. similarly, if i copy a DVD with Real's DVD copy program, Real has no right to impose DRM restrictions that force me to pay Real for additional licenses to play the media on other computers. if Real had negotiated a deal whereby the $20 playback fee went to the filmmakers, then they would have ethical grounds to make such claims, but this lawsuit shows they were just trying to line their pockets by putting DRM on other people's copyrighted works.
well, i don't know much about TV show production, but i know that with music, the biggest obstacle for indie artists is finding distribution. it doesn't matter how good your music is if you can't reach an audience and no one hears it. traditionally, the major labels, radio stations, and local promoters formed an industry-wide cartel that controlled which artists would succeed and which would fail. despite the public scandal surrounding it in the 1960's, payola is alive and well today. (Dexter Holland of the Offspring ostensibly fell out with Epitaph, i believe, over the recoupable costs of 3rd party promoters for keeping their "Come Out and Play" single on the radio, which is essentially modern payola.)
but these days, indie artists can often market and distribute their music themselves over the internet, thus bypassing the music cartels. if filmmakers can do the same, then you wouldn't need the backing of a major television network to reach audiences. right now it just seems like the major networks produce all of the good shows because their shows are all that we get to see. but smaller independent studios may start funding & producing their own serial programs if there were a way for them to get it to the public without being picked up by a major network.
good point. advertised speed increases are meaningless when those are burst speeds which are never obtained in real life.
as the parent adroitly pointed out, the fact that they cap each subscriber's monthly transfer rate at 250GB means that their network capacity is actually only 800kbps. they're just overselling more than ever.
i live in the suburbs of L.A. but my broadband bills are still several times those of similarly dense population centers in other countries.
if you were talking about Australia or Canada, where they have large sparsely populated wilderness and rural communities then that might be a fair excuse. (Canada actually has cheaper broadband than the U.S. in spite of this.) but most Americans live in metropolitan areas or their surrounding suburbs. a relatively small percentage of the population actually lives in places like Wisconsin or rural America.
check out this chart of average broadband speeds to see how far ahead Japan and Korea are. if we want to catch up to those countries, then we need expand infrastructure to meet demand, rather than artificially manipulate demand by putting tight restrictions on consumer broadband usage.
TV is already becoming an anachronism when almost everyone has broadband internet access through which they can receive on-demand content uncontrolled by the major television networks. now all that needs to be done is for a legal and user-friendly solutions to be developed.
Miro (formerly known as Democracy Player) is one service that directly connects content-producers with end users without going through traditional distribution channels. thus television networks are no longer the gatekeepers of media distribution.
well, i guess that's a little better. but still, why should i have to pay RealNetworks for the right to play my DVD rips/backups on other computers? i can understand if they want to charge me for additional licenses for the DVD-burning application, but charging for access to my own backup data via DRM? who's digital rights are they managing here? certainly not theirs since they do not own the copyright on the DVDs being copied?
i wasn't referring to the price of the software, i was referring to the additional fees charged for each DVD you burn if you want to play it on multiple computers.
from the /. summary:
i have a simple solution for stopping employees from using unauthorized gadgets at work:
you might also want to make sure that your company health plan doesn't cover work-related sterility.
does RealNetworks' DVD copying software _charge users $20_ for burning DVDs playable on multiple computers (still limited to a maximum of 5)?
how can they purport to be a champion of consumer rights/fair use when they're charging users to burn copies of their own DVDs and restricting users from playing these copies from more than 5 computers?
and who exactly are users paying the $20 to for being able to play their copies on more than one computer if not the MPAA or film makers? they actually have the galls to charge users for an additional license fee on works that they don't hold the rights to, and then they're turning around and saying that they're defending fair use rights? what a load of BS.
consumers should be allowed to make backups of their purchases without DRM and usage restrictions. they shouldn't have to pay for the right to make DVD copies that are playable on multiple computers, much less pay RealNetworks for that right.
you mean not everything bad that happens is a communist plot?
on a more interesting note, TFA states that yahoo has refused to cooperate with law-enforcement on this case on "privacy grounds." but didn't they hand over the user info on several Chinese dissidents, which led to an American national being falsely imprisoned?
i guess Yahoo will protect a user's privacy as long as they're a malicious criminal, but not if they're a prisoner of conscience. i guess it's time for me to close up my Yahoo! mail account for good.
well, a true communist society has yet to be realized on a large scale (though many communes operate under the same principles).
the problem is, the leap from capitalism to communism is a huge jump. Marx incorrectly assumed that such drastic cultural changes could be effected in a short time through violent revolution. but true communism is contingent on the existence of a democratic government--otherwise you cannot have a communally administered government that truly serves the will of the proletariat.
since the democratic will of the people reflects the society's culture, a capitalist society cannot be democratically converted to communism in a short period of time. so Leninism and Stalinism were adopted to force communism onto the people. but this undermines the fundamental ideals of an egalitarian utopia with the establishment of a military dictatorship.
neo-Marxist philosophers like Antonio Gramsci attempted to address the problems of Marxism, such as its failed eschatology which predicted popular proletariat uprisings in all capitalist societies, which would have avoided the need to establish faux communist regimes through military dictatorship. Gramsci expounded the pivotal idea of cultural hegemony. this was the missing piece of the picture that Marx and other early communists failed to take into account.
thus neo-Marxists address the issue of class struggle/warfare in more modern sociological terms. if you want to realize a communistic society, it has to be a gradual voluntary change achieved through cultural progress rather than military coercion. and this is much more likely to occur as people become more educated, which naturally creates a more progressive culture. social progress is a slow uphill battle against rearguard reactions, but slowly reforms are being made. most developed nations already have public education, universal health care, social welfare programs, etc.
progress always happens much quicker in smaller communities though. this is partly because democracy is diluted as population size grows and the social & political structure becomes more hierarchical. direct democracy doesn't exist in the U.S. beyond the state level, and participatory government is practically non-existent at the federal level. so as the result of the U.S.'s large geographic area and population size, we're a lot more reactionary than most developed nations.
my computer is probably worth less than $1000 at this point (it's a 4~5-year-old Dell). but i have a lot of data on it that is irreplaceable:
a few months ago i lost all of my CDs and DVDs when my ex moved into a new house, so what's backed up on my computer is all that i have left of my music & video collections. i also take lots of notes on my computer and keep contact info, reading lists, and similar lists for films/music/anime that i plan to check out in text documents on my desktop. these lists, like my music and video collection, have taken me years to compile. they have little value to other people, but i would be devastated if i lost this data, even if i was given a much better $3000 computer as a replacement.
hrmm... so is the phone service basically just VoIP over WiMAX? if so, then i see a lot of other cities following in Madison's footsteps.
it makes perfect sense to merge specialized communications networks, such as telecommunication, with internet access. nowadays an internet connection is just as important as a phone line, and you can transfer digital audio/video/text and any other data over the internet. so a dedicated telecommunications line is just redundant.
and when municipal Wi-Fi/WiMAX becomes as standard as roads/power lines, then we'll start seeing Wi-Fi/WiMAX mobile phones. we'll probably first see hybrid carrier-neutral wireless handsets, which can use Wi-Fi connections when available, but will default to cellular carriers if an open Wi-Fi network can't be found. and as slow adopters finally catch up to cities like SF, Madison, etc. and Wi-Fi coverage becomes ubiquitous, then more people will start using pure wireless VoIP handsets.
well, the success of this test shows that orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing can be used to implement wireless last-mile broadband.
the fact that this is a less-mature technology (was deployed before the WiMAX standard was finalized, so it is likely using an old draft of the WiMAX standard) means that we might be able to expect better performance from the official WiMAX protocol.
if anything, this test shows how WiMAX will perform under real-life conditions involving steel buildings, electronic noise, and moving network nodes. so far the results are positive.
if the current WiMAX standard has solved the problem with non-stationary network nodes, then it would surpass 3G cellular data networks in all ways, especially pricing.
IIRC Verizon Online also did this for a while. i was really upset when instead of a DNS error my browser automatically went to Verizon's (ad supported) search portal. i think i either changed the DNS setting on my router or it just went away. but in any case, i haven't seen it happen in a long time.
it's absolute BS that ISPs think they can just hijack the users' DNS error page. they already make money from subscription fees, but now they're hijacking subscribers' DNS errors to get ad views/clicks? not only is this unethical, but it undermines the HTTP protocol and screws with applications that require correct server responses.
this kind of abuse of power is exactly why we need communications infrastructure reform.