Actually I believe you have that backwards. It may be within your legal right to do something but that doesn't mean exercising that right is free from consequence.
You should not mistake the face of the government for the body. Eat some tainted meat and tell me how much control the face has over what the body subsequently does. It is the fatal flaw of democracy. It's easy to eat the meat and the present face may not have even been the one to do so, but once it has been done it is an intractable situation, nearly impossible to remedy.
I'd much rather weaponize the CDC. I remember that particular episode of "Sliders," it was pretty interesting to see the Surgeon General taking up such an inverse role.
Isn't the no server clause a qualification on unlimited? Of course the language is imprecise to their goals. You'll also find that if you constrain your usage to something consistent with typical residential use most ISPs won't bother you should you host services.
Minor detail, but the Bible was never written in Latin. Translated, sure but the original languages were Aramaic, Greek and Hebrew. As for understanding, you're missing the "not willing" part. For the moderately educated or better target audience of the NYT it should be of little consequence to reference a dictionary or other reference text should the reader be interested in understanding. In the same way, high-school level mathematics shouldn't be much of a reach. I don't think anyone was suggesting tensor products, or differential equations.
You're being charged for a certain capacity and you wish to exceed that. Network neutrality doesn't mean the buffet is all you can eat. Network neutrality means you have the right not to be displaced from the line just because you're after the lobster. If you want a dedicated 24/7 bandwidth you need to pay for it. You're claiming you deserve a dedicated OC3 at the price of a fractional T1.
The analogy is very much NOT flawed. You folks just don't get it. It doesn't matter how "FAST" you suck the gas down, it's how "MUCH" you consume. You are paying for the ability to transfer data at 1Gbps, not the right to do it 24/7. If you want to right to do it 24/7 then you need to pony up for an OC3. ISPs are offering bandwidth with the expectation of residential loads on their residential service. The total capacity is built out with the idea that while people in the neighborhood may occasionally drink from the firehose it averages out to the consumption of a garden hose. If your usage is disproportionate huge, you'll be call out on it because you're degrading service for everyone else.
A residential service is meant for residential purposes. Your TOS explicitly states this. If you wish to use your internet service for commercial purposes then you pay for commercial service. Implicit with your residential service is a certain expectation of consumption. To use a car analogy, you are buying a tank of gas. Your subscription dictates how much fuel you get. If you're paying for the consumption of a passenger car, why should you expect to get the fuel for a public bus? This isn't a network neutrality issue. This is attempting to freeload and crying when you aren't given what you didn't pay for.
I wonder how much his research would have cost device makers monetarily... Does anyone know if the research he was going to present is or will still be made publicly available?
Here's a thought. Stop trying to throw 3D pies in my face and actually sell me a persuasive plot. If you don't want me to wait for Netflix, provide a compelling experience at a fair price.
Here's a really crazy thought. A thought based on something that really pissed me off all through my schooling. At the end of the day, kids (which may or may not themselves be stupid) that took stupid, easy courses would earn better grades than those that busted their butt taking challenging courses. An "A" grade in physical education, or introductory algebra should most certainly NOT mean the same thing as an "A" in biology, or Calculus. It's unfair, and discouraging to those students that are truly accomplishing something. Why try so hard when you're surrounded by dumba**es taking slacker classes and pulling off better grades than you.
There are plenty of other reasons why you wouldn't want to tele-operate combat vehicles ranging from ethical to technical. Setting the ethical aside, one of the most glaring reasons why you would want to retain manned vehicles would be the mitigation of the risk that someone would jack or jam your drones.
That's beautiful. I'm sure your fantastical idealism will get you far. Unfortunately, your views are not in alignment with anything other than your fantasy. We are ruled by bureaucrats and M.I.C. power brokers for whom no checks and balances have ever truly existed. Politicians are little more than two-dimensional sheep standing in as smoke and cover for our true masters.
Obviously we should vote, and obviously we should lobby our government representation. However weak they may be, they are the only legal lever we have. Regrettably these steps only address but a small fraction of our government, its reach and its behavior. The Snowdens of the world are the ones that extend our representation, extend our leverage. We need to convince the politicians that the security of their position in office would be more so if they facilitated whistle blowing.
Slashdot Mirror
An excellent observation, but then that's always been the problem with the foot-soldiers of bureaucracies right? No accountability to the public.
You were explicitly fingering Obama...
How ironic it is to see the first post under "You may like to read:" be DuckDuckGo: Illusion of Privacy...
Remember:
Knowledge is power, but he who controls the information reigns supreme. --Hackers Creed
Actually I believe you have that backwards. It may be within your legal right to do something but that doesn't mean exercising that right is free from consequence.
You should not mistake the face of the government for the body. Eat some tainted meat and tell me how much control the face has over what the body subsequently does. It is the fatal flaw of democracy. It's easy to eat the meat and the present face may not have even been the one to do so, but once it has been done it is an intractable situation, nearly impossible to remedy.
No will it remove the now well entrenched organizations, laws, etc. established by the predecessor.
Maybe it's a bit like sex. Those that brag about it the most are the ones least likely to be getting any.
I'd much rather weaponize the CDC. I remember that particular episode of "Sliders," it was pretty interesting to see the Surgeon General taking up such an inverse role.
Isn't the no server clause a qualification on unlimited? Of course the language is imprecise to their goals. You'll also find that if you constrain your usage to something consistent with typical residential use most ISPs won't bother you should you host services.
Minor detail, but the Bible was never written in Latin. Translated, sure but the original languages were Aramaic, Greek and Hebrew. As for understanding, you're missing the "not willing" part. For the moderately educated or better target audience of the NYT it should be of little consequence to reference a dictionary or other reference text should the reader be interested in understanding. In the same way, high-school level mathematics shouldn't be much of a reach. I don't think anyone was suggesting tensor products, or differential equations.
You're being charged for a certain capacity and you wish to exceed that. Network neutrality doesn't mean the buffet is all you can eat. Network neutrality means you have the right not to be displaced from the line just because you're after the lobster. If you want a dedicated 24/7 bandwidth you need to pay for it. You're claiming you deserve a dedicated OC3 at the price of a fractional T1.
The analogy is very much NOT flawed. You folks just don't get it. It doesn't matter how "FAST" you suck the gas down, it's how "MUCH" you consume. You are paying for the ability to transfer data at 1Gbps, not the right to do it 24/7. If you want to right to do it 24/7 then you need to pony up for an OC3. ISPs are offering bandwidth with the expectation of residential loads on their residential service. The total capacity is built out with the idea that while people in the neighborhood may occasionally drink from the firehose it averages out to the consumption of a garden hose. If your usage is disproportionate huge, you'll be call out on it because you're degrading service for everyone else.
A residential service is meant for residential purposes. Your TOS explicitly states this. If you wish to use your internet service for commercial purposes then you pay for commercial service. Implicit with your residential service is a certain expectation of consumption. To use a car analogy, you are buying a tank of gas. Your subscription dictates how much fuel you get. If you're paying for the consumption of a passenger car, why should you expect to get the fuel for a public bus? This isn't a network neutrality issue. This is attempting to freeload and crying when you aren't given what you didn't pay for.
I wonder how much his research would have cost device makers monetarily... Does anyone know if the research he was going to present is or will still be made publicly available?
I could think of worse things to lose than the "worst part of waking up". That isn't coffee, it's charred saw dust and they can keep it.
No it's about finding ways to increase M.I.C. spending by creating friction between rival states.
Junk mail is what has traditionally kept the USPS afloat.
Bunch of candy-ass whiners I tell you... Tell that to anyone living in the upper midwest or Canada and see how long they keep a straight face.
Here's a thought. Stop trying to throw 3D pies in my face and actually sell me a persuasive plot. If you don't want me to wait for Netflix, provide a compelling experience at a fair price.
Here's a really crazy thought. A thought based on something that really pissed me off all through my schooling. At the end of the day, kids (which may or may not themselves be stupid) that took stupid, easy courses would earn better grades than those that busted their butt taking challenging courses. An "A" grade in physical education, or introductory algebra should most certainly NOT mean the same thing as an "A" in biology, or Calculus. It's unfair, and discouraging to those students that are truly accomplishing something. Why try so hard when you're surrounded by dumba**es taking slacker classes and pulling off better grades than you.
*sigh* Fine. Spoil my hopes and dreams with facts.
Good old Walt might finally get his due... I can't wait.
There are plenty of other reasons why you wouldn't want to tele-operate combat vehicles ranging from ethical to technical. Setting the ethical aside, one of the most glaring reasons why you would want to retain manned vehicles would be the mitigation of the risk that someone would jack or jam your drones.
Of course not. So long as it is clandestine, it is perfectly acceptable and no one need have a guilty conscience.
That's beautiful. I'm sure your fantastical idealism will get you far. Unfortunately, your views are not in alignment with anything other than your fantasy. We are ruled by bureaucrats and M.I.C. power brokers for whom no checks and balances have ever truly existed. Politicians are little more than two-dimensional sheep standing in as smoke and cover for our true masters.
Obviously we should vote, and obviously we should lobby our government representation. However weak they may be, they are the only legal lever we have. Regrettably these steps only address but a small fraction of our government, its reach and its behavior. The Snowdens of the world are the ones that extend our representation, extend our leverage. We need to convince the politicians that the security of their position in office would be more so if they facilitated whistle blowing.