Umm. Actually cows and chickens are not exactly "natural". There's no such thing as a "wild cow" or "wild chicken". They were both genetically engineered through thousands of years of selective breeding. Modern genetic engineering is really no different except that it modifies the genes directly rather than indirectly through breeding.
They're really the only company out there that almost NEVER gives in on these things, even if it makes financial sense to do so. If there were just 10 more companies like EchoStar then this whole problem would cease to exist.
This is interesting in that it's a battle that has been going back and forth between the pro and anti gambling forces forever. Back in the 40's some sly slot machine manufacturers put "skill-stops" on their machines that allowed you to press a button to stop the reel when you wanted. For a number of years these were "legal" because they were classified as games of skill. Eventually, however, the government always comes back with new definitions that close the loopholes.
The planes on 9/11 were flying very low. There are lots of reasons for this, but the biggest is that if you're trying to hit buildings it's a lot easier if you're already at 1,000 ft than if you've got to drop from 20,000 ft.
Above about 8,000 ft cell phones don't work well (if at all), but they can potentially reserve a channel in tens of cells, thus using up very valuable resources and locking people on the ground out.
Hmmmm. so, using your logic it would be OK under net-neutrality for Verizon to degrade SIP packets in favor of IAX2 packets. Oh, and by the way, Verizon uses IAX2 for their VoIP service so therefore if you're using someone else's SIP based service you're SOL. They're not discriminating against any 'person' as you so eloquently put in your message, just a protocol. After everyone else starts using IAX2 for their VoIP to get around Verizon's anti-competitive behavior, Verizon instead switches to a proprietary VoIP protocol and again, all the other guys are SOL.
This is EXACTLY the behavior that Net Neutrality was supposed to STOP.
P.S. Verizon doesn't use IAX2, this was just an illustration..
Hmmm. That's interesting. I'm glad that finally someone understands that Net Neutrality forbids the prioritization of some traffic (e.g. VoIP traffic) over other traffic. Your solution however is interesting because it falls under the specific exception within the bill "Nothing in this section shall prohibit a broadband network provider from implementing reasonable and nondiscriminatory measures to offer varying levels of transmission speed or bandwidth" I think your solution would fit under this category even though you might also read that this provision actually pertains to a bandwidth cap as opposed to your more hybrid "bandwidth over time" model.
"An ISP may not block, impair, degrade, discriminate against or interfere with the ability of any person to utilize their broadband service to access, use, send, receive, or offer lawful content, applications, or services over broadband networks, including the Internet."
Therefore, if you degrade my service (which is 100% bittorrent) and don't degrade your service (with is 100% VOIP) then you're in violation of Net Neutrality.
Read the bill (the quote is from it). The notion of "every packet must be considered equal, regardless of source, destination or content" has generally been inferred from the phrase in the Net Neutrality bill.
Ummm. An honest read of the Net Neutrality bill almost certainly means that spam filtering by the ISP is illegal.
"An ISP may not block, impair, degrade, discriminate against or interfere with the ability of any person to utilize their broadband service to access, use, send, receive, or offer lawful content, applications, or services over broadband networks, including the Internet."
In other words, If I'm a spammer and following the laws regarding spamming then no ISP is allowed to filter my packets destined for your e-mail account.
It also certainly precludes the filtering of outbound port 25 connections by the ISP which just about any ISP manager will tell you has probably been one of the most effective tools at fighting spam.
Read the bill!! An ISP may not block, impair, degrade, discriminate against or interfere with the ability of any person to utilize their broadband service to access, use, send, receive, or offer lawful content, applications, or services over broadband networks, including the Internet.
Therefore, if my traffic, which is 100% bittorrent is in any way degraded from your traffic, which is 100% VOIP, our ISP is performing an illegal action.
Ummm. No. Net Neutrality specifically states that each packet needs to be treated the same with respect to priority regardless of source / destination or contents. Therefore you can't prefer one packet over another. My reading of the bill leads me to believe that even things like fair queuing (which gives more priority to smaller packets) that a significant number of routers are capable of would technically be illegal..
Even if you fixed this problem and were able to effectively remove the outgoing audio from the incoming this would still be an exploit for any computer near the computer making the sounds. Your cube-mates computer has no idea if the playback is coming from your computer or from your cube-mate himself.
I can imagine someone in a crowded office going to a site with the audio "Shutdown Now" embedded and suddenly the whole office shuts down..
There's lots of parts of the hardware configuration that HP "bundles" that I end up paying for even though I immediately throw out. I run a 1GB Ethernet, so the money I pay for the on-board Ethernet is just wasted. It should be illegal to bundle the Ethernet on the motherboard. Similarly, I put my own video card in, so make sure you're not bundling in a Video card. I prefer Seagate Hard Drives so if you're bundling in something else, shame shame shame. Clearly these are not integral portions of the system because I can run a computer without a hard drive, a video card, and an Ethernet port.
Let's go a bit farther. I really would prefer a Xeon processor in my machine, but HP only bundles desktops with lessor processors. Boooo! I cry FOUL! Take em' to court! Chipset? Heck, there's lots of options on the market. Why does HP force me into a particular bundle? Same goes with memory manufacturers. Why should I be forced to buy the memory from whoever HP is in bed with.
I think HP should be required to only sell a bare-bones case from which I can populate with 3rd party components. Oh, and clearly that case should not come with a power supply, because I might want to use someone else's power supply. And the screws that hold the case on? Don't saddle me with your forced add-ons!! I can buy screws at any hardware store!
Ummm... Because this is FRANCE, and free-market arguments like yours just don't seem to go over. Did you know that there is no French word for "logical".
Understood. And I agree 100%. It would be a nightmare to convert the values, but not impossible. If I were to walk your dog in exchange for you babysitting my kids, that transaction would be taxable. It would be tough to assign an actual value to those items, but eventually (probably through litigation) one would be established. The Second Life example is actually relatively simple because there IS an exchange rate setup between Linden Dollars and US$.
As for your example with owning a business in Canada, you would get taxed in both Canada and the US, with the Canadian taxes being used as a credit against the US taxes. Similar systems could be conceived of if the game-maker decided to leverage "taxes".
The difference between "capital gains" and "income" is pretty well established. Capital gains taxes are assessed on goods (be they real or virtual) that you buy, hold, and sell. Income taxes are assessed on the value (either real or perceived) that you receive in exchange for a service. Income is taxable immediately. Capital Gains are taxable upon their sale. In your example, your Linden Business is in fact an asset and therefore the value of it would only be taxed when you sold the business. However, the 1 million dollar profit every year is income and therefore is taxable upon receipt.
Keep in mind that "real money" is actually not much different than "virtual money". There's nothing of value that really backs up the real money. It's simply the perception of value.
However, it's really a moot point. The IRS doesn't tax MONEY per say, but rather INCOME. Granted, most people make their income in terms of "real money" so it's easy to get confused, but if, for instance, you traded your car for someone to come over and replace the roof on your house, that person would still have to pay income tax based on the perceived value of the transaction. Is it such a stretch that if someone paid X linden dollars to have their real-world roof replaced, there should be a similar real-world taxation event? Is it such a stretch from there that if someone paid X linden dollars to have their virtual-world roof replaced, there should also be a taxation event?
This service just looks at what is already visible by people driving around. Google Earth captures what goes on in my backyard and on my roof deck. I consider that area quite private and I believe that I should have the right to keep that private. If my wife decided to sunbathe topless in the back yard I think she should be free from Google's roving eye-in-the-sky peeping in on her.
Ummmm.. Wrong. Ever seen a reality show ("Real World" comes to mind, as does "Airline", "Amazing Race", etc.) Real World frequently walks around outside capturing hundreds of random people's images. No way they got consent from everyone. Airline sets up cameras in airports and also captures hundreds to thousands of people's images in every shot. Again, no way they get everyone's consent.
Did you READ the article??? It states that peak oil from "non-OPEC" sources is coming. However, from the article:
"After 2010, the call on OPEC increases quickly, requiring OPEC to add more than 1 MBD [million barrels per day] of capacity every year," notes the Outlook. "OPEC's resources are large enough to achieve this rate of expansion, and we expect that investments will be made in a timely manner."
Ummm. Don't forget that the CableCard rental will probably be the same price as your current digital STB rental fee. Plus, you need TWO of them for the Tivo. Your $3 more per month just went up to $13 more per month...
An example here is the TiVo. They use GPL code in the development of their system, but then severly lock down their hardware so that it's nearly impossible to run anything other than the stock system on their machine.
Clearly the spirit of Stallman's idea that software should be freely modifiable is violated if the only piece of hardware the software will run on is locked down such that modifications are not possible...
Slashdot Mirror
Umm. Actually cows and chickens are not exactly "natural". There's no such thing as a "wild cow" or "wild chicken". They were both genetically engineered through thousands of years of selective breeding. Modern genetic engineering is really no different except that it modifies the genes directly rather than indirectly through breeding.
They're really the only company out there that almost NEVER gives in on these things, even if it makes financial sense to do so. If there were just 10 more companies like EchoStar then this whole problem would cease to exist.
This is interesting in that it's a battle that has been going back and forth between the pro and anti gambling forces forever. Back in the 40's some sly slot machine manufacturers put "skill-stops" on their machines that allowed you to press a button to stop the reel when you wanted. For a number of years these were "legal" because they were classified as games of skill. Eventually, however, the government always comes back with new definitions that close the loopholes.
The planes on 9/11 were flying very low. There are lots of reasons for this, but the biggest is that if you're trying to hit buildings it's a lot easier if you're already at 1,000 ft than if you've got to drop from 20,000 ft. Above about 8,000 ft cell phones don't work well (if at all), but they can potentially reserve a channel in tens of cells, thus using up very valuable resources and locking people on the ground out.
Hmmmm. so, using your logic it would be OK under net-neutrality for Verizon to degrade SIP packets in favor of IAX2 packets. Oh, and by the way, Verizon uses IAX2 for their VoIP service so therefore if you're using someone else's SIP based service you're SOL. They're not discriminating against any 'person' as you so eloquently put in your message, just a protocol. After everyone else starts using IAX2 for their VoIP to get around Verizon's anti-competitive behavior, Verizon instead switches to a proprietary VoIP protocol and again, all the other guys are SOL.
This is EXACTLY the behavior that Net Neutrality was supposed to STOP.
P.S. Verizon doesn't use IAX2, this was just an illustration..
Hmmm. That's interesting. I'm glad that finally someone understands that Net Neutrality forbids the prioritization of some traffic (e.g. VoIP traffic) over other traffic. Your solution however is interesting because it falls under the specific exception within the bill "Nothing in this section shall prohibit a broadband network provider from implementing reasonable and nondiscriminatory measures to offer varying levels of transmission speed or bandwidth" I think your solution would fit under this category even though you might also read that this provision actually pertains to a bandwidth cap as opposed to your more hybrid "bandwidth over time" model.
"An ISP may not block, impair, degrade, discriminate against or interfere with the ability of any person to utilize their broadband service to access, use, send, receive, or offer lawful content, applications, or services over broadband networks, including the Internet."
Therefore, if you degrade my service (which is 100% bittorrent) and don't degrade your service (with is 100% VOIP) then you're in violation of Net Neutrality.
Read the bill (the quote is from it). The notion of "every packet must be considered equal, regardless of source, destination or content" has generally been inferred from the phrase in the Net Neutrality bill.
Ummm. An honest read of the Net Neutrality bill almost certainly means that spam filtering by the ISP is illegal. "An ISP may not block, impair, degrade, discriminate against or interfere with the ability of any person to utilize their broadband service to access, use, send, receive, or offer lawful content, applications, or services over broadband networks, including the Internet."
In other words, If I'm a spammer and following the laws regarding spamming then no ISP is allowed to filter my packets destined for your e-mail account.
It also certainly precludes the filtering of outbound port 25 connections by the ISP which just about any ISP manager will tell you has probably been one of the most effective tools at fighting spam.
Read the bill!! An ISP may not block, impair, degrade, discriminate against or interfere with the ability of any person to utilize their broadband service to access, use, send, receive, or offer lawful content, applications, or services over broadband networks, including the Internet. Therefore, if my traffic, which is 100% bittorrent is in any way degraded from your traffic, which is 100% VOIP, our ISP is performing an illegal action.
Ummm. No. Net Neutrality specifically states that each packet needs to be treated the same with respect to priority regardless of source / destination or contents. Therefore you can't prefer one packet over another. My reading of the bill leads me to believe that even things like fair queuing (which gives more priority to smaller packets) that a significant number of routers are capable of would technically be illegal..
Even if you fixed this problem and were able to effectively remove the outgoing audio from the incoming this would still be an exploit for any computer near the computer making the sounds. Your cube-mates computer has no idea if the playback is coming from your computer or from your cube-mate himself. I can imagine someone in a crowded office going to a site with the audio "Shutdown Now" embedded and suddenly the whole office shuts down..
There's lots of parts of the hardware configuration that HP "bundles" that I end up paying for even though I immediately throw out. I run a 1GB Ethernet, so the money I pay for the on-board Ethernet is just wasted. It should be illegal to bundle the Ethernet on the motherboard. Similarly, I put my own video card in, so make sure you're not bundling in a Video card. I prefer Seagate Hard Drives so if you're bundling in something else, shame shame shame. Clearly these are not integral portions of the system because I can run a computer without a hard drive, a video card, and an Ethernet port. Let's go a bit farther. I really would prefer a Xeon processor in my machine, but HP only bundles desktops with lessor processors. Boooo! I cry FOUL! Take em' to court! Chipset? Heck, there's lots of options on the market. Why does HP force me into a particular bundle? Same goes with memory manufacturers. Why should I be forced to buy the memory from whoever HP is in bed with. I think HP should be required to only sell a bare-bones case from which I can populate with 3rd party components. Oh, and clearly that case should not come with a power supply, because I might want to use someone else's power supply. And the screws that hold the case on? Don't saddle me with your forced add-ons!! I can buy screws at any hardware store!
Ummm... Because this is FRANCE, and free-market arguments like yours just don't seem to go over. Did you know that there is no French word for "logical".
Understood. And I agree 100%. It would be a nightmare to convert the values, but not impossible. If I were to walk your dog in exchange for you babysitting my kids, that transaction would be taxable. It would be tough to assign an actual value to those items, but eventually (probably through litigation) one would be established. The Second Life example is actually relatively simple because there IS an exchange rate setup between Linden Dollars and US$. As for your example with owning a business in Canada, you would get taxed in both Canada and the US, with the Canadian taxes being used as a credit against the US taxes. Similar systems could be conceived of if the game-maker decided to leverage "taxes".
The difference between "capital gains" and "income" is pretty well established. Capital gains taxes are assessed on goods (be they real or virtual) that you buy, hold, and sell. Income taxes are assessed on the value (either real or perceived) that you receive in exchange for a service. Income is taxable immediately. Capital Gains are taxable upon their sale. In your example, your Linden Business is in fact an asset and therefore the value of it would only be taxed when you sold the business. However, the 1 million dollar profit every year is income and therefore is taxable upon receipt.
Keep in mind that "real money" is actually not much different than "virtual money". There's nothing of value that really backs up the real money. It's simply the perception of value. However, it's really a moot point. The IRS doesn't tax MONEY per say, but rather INCOME. Granted, most people make their income in terms of "real money" so it's easy to get confused, but if, for instance, you traded your car for someone to come over and replace the roof on your house, that person would still have to pay income tax based on the perceived value of the transaction. Is it such a stretch that if someone paid X linden dollars to have their real-world roof replaced, there should be a similar real-world taxation event? Is it such a stretch from there that if someone paid X linden dollars to have their virtual-world roof replaced, there should also be a taxation event?
This service just looks at what is already visible by people driving around. Google Earth captures what goes on in my backyard and on my roof deck. I consider that area quite private and I believe that I should have the right to keep that private. If my wife decided to sunbathe topless in the back yard I think she should be free from Google's roving eye-in-the-sky peeping in on her.
Ummmm.. Wrong. Ever seen a reality show ("Real World" comes to mind, as does "Airline", "Amazing Race", etc.) Real World frequently walks around outside capturing hundreds of random people's images. No way they got consent from everyone. Airline sets up cameras in airports and also captures hundreds to thousands of people's images in every shot. Again, no way they get everyone's consent.
Oracle has a million more configuration options than SQL Server. It only makes sense that there will therefore be many more bugs.
Ummm. Don't forget that the CableCard rental will probably be the same price as your current digital STB rental fee. Plus, you need TWO of them for the Tivo. Your $3 more per month just went up to $13 more per month...
An example here is the TiVo. They use GPL code in the development of their system, but then severly lock down their hardware so that it's nearly impossible to run anything other than the stock system on their machine. Clearly the spirit of Stallman's idea that software should be freely modifiable is violated if the only piece of hardware the software will run on is locked down such that modifications are not possible...