I was with an ISP which, earlier this year, started blocking TPB. Gave me the push I needed to switch to a different ISP which conveniently also costs $5 less per month.
I have a feeling that, if this happens, only the big players will implement it. A lot of the smaller guys see it as a big selling point that they don't do any traffic shaping and such, and some of them even offered free SSL tunnels as part of their basic service back when the big players were trying to throttle torrent traffic over the bulk bandwidth which they sold to the smaller companies.
I'm aware of those possibilities, but they're such horrible workarounds that I feel dirty just contemplating the idea. If Amazon is deliberately going to keep their service incompatible with Google products, I don't feel any great desire to use them. I can always just grab their content from torrent sites.
There's also a difference between "there are no alternatives" and "all the alternatives are slower or more expensive".
If Comcast is the cheapest and fastest ISP in your area, then that really sucks. But you DO have other options. Comcast is obviously not a monopoly when you're telling me you have multiple DSL providers available, AND you have satellite and cellular on top of that.
Basically at this point your complaint isn't "Comcast is a monopoly" so much as "I'm unhappy that none of my many options are as cheap and fast as I want them to be". I can certainly sympathise with you, but that's not much of an argument for having the government come in and regulate the internet.
If the salary isn't enough to get you interested it's very likely the very last job that will be taken over by AI.
Seems more likely to be one of the first. I think we are going to succeed in making an AI which can make better AIs long before we build an AI which can actually replace any other complex profession. It doesn't even have too be that good at it initially... it will get better all on it's own.
The large providers may not directly compete with each other in certain areas, but plenty of smaller ones step in to fill the void.
I've had this discussion with so many people who claim that "there is no other choice in my area". So I hit up Google, and 30 seconds later I have a list of 5 other ISPs in their area, not including mobile providers.
"I'm not aware of other options" is not the same as "there are no other options".
But yes, you certainly could do a better job of opening up the market to encourage even more competition. Right now the biggest obstacles to entry are regulatory and legal restrictions. You have too many laws, not too few.
Oh, sorry about that. I just assumed you were intelligent enough to realise that, if you're going to link to examples, you should probably link to the best ones rather than completely irrelevant ones. My bad.
Now that we've clarified that, could you possibly link to some GOOD examples of oil industry patents which have kept other energy production methods from competing?
It's hit and miss; my mother has one of those set-top android boxes, so I installed the Prime Video app on it for her with my credentials. Seems to work just fine that way; she gets plenty of use out of it, so at least one of us gets to enjoy it.
Maybe it's just the casting on it that's problematic.
Well, sure, I can see how his words might have been interpreted that way by people for whom English is a second language, as well as dogmatic idiots looking to confirm their biases. But I think those people are in the minority; I would say that the majority of people who call him racist really are just confused about what the word itself means
"Russian" in this context is a nationality. While "Race" was once used to distinguish people by language, location or politics, that custom disappeared several hundred years ago. Perhaps the gulag's educational system has not kept up?
It's not just the Gulag; there's no shortage of Americans calling Trump "racist" because he purposed a ban on Muslim immigration from certain countries, or because he wants to build a wall between the US and Mexico. This wanton abuse of the word "racist" is quite common.
They wished that General George Patton had continued fighting at the end of WW II and leveled Moscow.
Given the inedible waste of the cold war which followed, and the insane number of lives lost to communist policies inside the USSR, that might very well have been the better option. It would certainly have been better for the many vassal states which, for decades, were ruled by the dictators in Moscow.
This only again has a few thinking errors: a) nuclear power is not the cheapest, it is more expensive than any other form
That's not actually true, but, pretending for a minute that it is, it doesn't change what we were talking about at all. The costs associated with building and decommissioning are the vast majority of the cost of nuclear. After that, running the plant at 99% constantly vs running it at a 50% capacity average, there is essentially zero increase in cost. The "extra" electricity is essentially free.
b) hydrolysis is not inefficient I'm super tired about hering this bullshit
Not sure about hydrolysis, but electrolysis certainly is.
c) nevertheless what would you do with the hydrogen?
Rocket fuel? Further reprocessing into liquid fuels?
d) 90% of all countries have no use for a desalination plant, we have rain
The gweenies tell me that we are running out of fresh water, so go argue with them.
e) a few of the countries that had use for a desalination plant, you most likely wont like having a nuke plant
Are you seriously suggesting that a handful of old battery patents are what stopped all other modes of energy production from being competitive with fossil fuels? Do you have any idea how ridiculous that is? Are you imagining that these were some magical unicorn batteries which could store 100 MWh per square centimetre or something?
If your nuclear plant is situated near a large body of salt water, you could use any excess to desalinate water. Or, hell, have an electrolysis facility next door and break down the water into hydrogen and oxygen. Sure, electrolysis isn't very efficient, but the energy cost at that point is so low that it really doesn't matter.
A 20% drop can be VERY significant since wind turbines have a minimum wind speed below which they produce zero electricity. So it's not like you can just assume that if at the high wind average they're producing 100 MW, then at 20% less average wind they'll produce 80 MW. It doesn't scale that way. Depending on the actual speeds that 20% decrease in the average could very well be the difference between 100 MW and 10 MW.
I don't know what the actual situation in Texas is; maybe their 20% difference really doesn't account to much. I just thought I should point out that it's not as simple as you seen to think it is.
You should probably open up the market to allow greater competition, thereby removing Comcast's ability to abuse their position.
Anyway you already have laws against monopolies, so if, as you say, Comcast is a monopoly abusing it's power, then why the hell do you need new laws? Start by enforcing existing ones.
Slashdot Mirror
He was there and personally interviewed every single person in attendance. You should like totally trust him and stuff
You sound like the twat whose solution to STDs is "hurr durr just don't have sex".
Que?
I was with an ISP which, earlier this year, started blocking TPB. Gave me the push I needed to switch to a different ISP which conveniently also costs $5 less per month.
I have a feeling that, if this happens, only the big players will implement it. A lot of the smaller guys see it as a big selling point that they don't do any traffic shaping and such, and some of them even offered free SSL tunnels as part of their basic service back when the big players were trying to throttle torrent traffic over the bulk bandwidth which they sold to the smaller companies.
If not, I suppose there's always VPNs.
I'm aware of those possibilities, but they're such horrible workarounds that I feel dirty just contemplating the idea. If Amazon is deliberately going to keep their service incompatible with Google products, I don't feel any great desire to use them. I can always just grab their content from torrent sites.
Must be because I'm a Nazi.
With you as it's teacher I'm sure its going to do fine.
Newsflash: Qualcom is making a new processor which will be faster and stuff. No more details at this time.
Gee, thanks. I would have never guessed.
There's also a difference between "there are no alternatives" and "all the alternatives are slower or more expensive".
If Comcast is the cheapest and fastest ISP in your area, then that really sucks. But you DO have other options. Comcast is obviously not a monopoly when you're telling me you have multiple DSL providers available, AND you have satellite and cellular on top of that.
Basically at this point your complaint isn't "Comcast is a monopoly" so much as "I'm unhappy that none of my many options are as cheap and fast as I want them to be". I can certainly sympathise with you, but that's not much of an argument for having the government come in and regulate the internet.
If the salary isn't enough to get you interested it's very likely the very last job that will be taken over by AI.
Seems more likely to be one of the first. I think we are going to succeed in making an AI which can make better AIs long before we build an AI which can actually replace any other complex profession. It doesn't even have too be that good at it initially ... it will get better all on it's own.
The large providers may not directly compete with each other in certain areas, but plenty of smaller ones step in to fill the void.
I've had this discussion with so many people who claim that "there is no other choice in my area". So I hit up Google, and 30 seconds later I have a list of 5 other ISPs in their area, not including mobile providers.
"I'm not aware of other options" is not the same as "there are no other options".
But yes, you certainly could do a better job of opening up the market to encourage even more competition. Right now the biggest obstacles to entry are regulatory and legal restrictions. You have too many laws, not too few.
Oh, sorry about that. I just assumed you were intelligent enough to realise that, if you're going to link to examples, you should probably link to the best ones rather than completely irrelevant ones. My bad.
Now that we've clarified that, could you possibly link to some GOOD examples of oil industry patents which have kept other energy production methods from competing?
It's hit and miss; my mother has one of those set-top android boxes, so I installed the Prime Video app on it for her with my credentials. Seems to work just fine that way; she gets plenty of use out of it, so at least one of us gets to enjoy it.
Maybe it's just the casting on it that's problematic.
Or maybe they're not-subtly saying that he's racist and proposing a ban on Muslim immigration because Muslims are predominantly Arab
Only about 15% of Muslims are Arab.
Also Arab isn't a race, either, so that's a double fail there.
and proposing to build an ineffectual and costly wall between the US and Mexico to tap into anti-Latino racism?
"Latino" also isn't a race. Neither is "Hispanic", any more than "Anglo" is.
Seriously, it should be transparently obvious to everyone that Trump is racist because of the things he says and does
When you have no clue what the words "race" and "racist" mean, I suppose it is. It's also wrong.
A Chromecast is the google equivalent of your fire stick thingy.
I have a Chromecast, and I have Amazon prime. But I never actually watch anything on Prime Video because their damn app won't cast to the Chromecast.
Well, sure, I can see how his words might have been interpreted that way by people for whom English is a second language, as well as dogmatic idiots looking to confirm their biases. But I think those people are in the minority; I would say that the majority of people who call him racist really are just confused about what the word itself means
"Russian" in this context is a nationality. While "Race" was once used to distinguish people by language, location or politics, that custom disappeared several hundred years ago. Perhaps the gulag's educational system has not kept up?
It's not just the Gulag; there's no shortage of Americans calling Trump "racist" because he purposed a ban on Muslim immigration from certain countries, or because he wants to build a wall between the US and Mexico. This wanton abuse of the word "racist" is quite common.
They wished that General George Patton had continued fighting at the end of WW II and leveled Moscow.
Given the inedible waste of the cold war which followed, and the insane number of lives lost to communist policies inside the USSR, that might very well have been the better option. It would certainly have been better for the many vassal states which, for decades, were ruled by the dictators in Moscow.
This only again has a few thinking errors:
a) nuclear power is not the cheapest, it is more expensive than any other form
That's not actually true, but, pretending for a minute that it is, it doesn't change what we were talking about at all. The costs associated with building and decommissioning are the vast majority of the cost of nuclear. After that, running the plant at 99% constantly vs running it at a 50% capacity average, there is essentially zero increase in cost. The "extra" electricity is essentially free.
b) hydrolysis is not inefficient I'm super tired about hering this bullshit
Not sure about hydrolysis, but electrolysis certainly is.
c) nevertheless what would you do with the hydrogen?
Rocket fuel? Further reprocessing into liquid fuels?
d) 90% of all countries have no use for a desalination plant, we have rain
The gweenies tell me that we are running out of fresh water, so go argue with them.
e) a few of the countries that had use for a desalination plant, you most likely wont like having a nuke plant
If you say so.
Should I go on?
Probably not.
Are you seriously suggesting that a handful of old battery patents are what stopped all other modes of energy production from being competitive with fossil fuels? Do you have any idea how ridiculous that is? Are you imagining that these were some magical unicorn batteries which could store 100 MWh per square centimetre or something?
lol. Solar isn't a viable solution even today, but you want people to believe it could have fixed the problem 50 years ago?
You have a great sense of humour, I'll give you that!
If your nuclear plant is situated near a large body of salt water, you could use any excess to desalinate water. Or, hell, have an electrolysis facility next door and break down the water into hydrogen and oxygen. Sure, electrolysis isn't very efficient, but the energy cost at that point is so low that it really doesn't matter.
A 20% drop can be VERY significant since wind turbines have a minimum wind speed below which they produce zero electricity. So it's not like you can just assume that if at the high wind average they're producing 100 MW, then at 20% less average wind they'll produce 80 MW. It doesn't scale that way. Depending on the actual speeds that 20% decrease in the average could very well be the difference between 100 MW and 10 MW.
I don't know what the actual situation in Texas is; maybe their 20% difference really doesn't account to much. I just thought I should point out that it's not as simple as you seen to think it is.
~30,000
Math!
Probably to offset the ignorant buttheads who have no clue what they're talking about.
You should probably open up the market to allow greater competition, thereby removing Comcast's ability to abuse their position.
Anyway you already have laws against monopolies, so if, as you say, Comcast is a monopoly abusing it's power, then why the hell do you need new laws? Start by enforcing existing ones.