I remember that also being an argument against the DMCA; that small devices like hearing aids made temporary copies in memory, and under the DMCA, would have to have the ability to support DRM for such things.
So why is it ok for cars, but not ok for your variable speed drill? Or, better yet, why should the manufacturer of a drill be obligated to provide the true speed of the drill, whereas an ISP is not obligated to provide the true average speed of the connection?
Possibly, but there are many more factors preventing competition in the ISP space, including the fact that anyone who wants to start one probably is going to have to dig up the roads to start.
That's his point: These people see that the messenger is corrupt, therefore the whole message is invalid. It doesn't matter that his sins were unrelated to the actual research, they still see this as an argument against vaccination.
I'm going to disagree with you on education. Having an educated populace benefits everyone, not just those with children. Well educated populations typically have lower crime rates, and higher prosperity rates. You could decide that the public shouldn't pay for it, but then there would be less of a chance for those already in lower income areas to get an education.
Which is why the way broadband is rated needs to change. Instead of selling by the theoretical maximum, which many users probably won't get, they should go by the speed that most of their customers in that tier see 90% of the time. Possibly rounded down to get a nice, even number, instead of 4.38789473 Mbps.
I personally would see that as a reasonable justification for ending Comcasat, possibly breaking them up into much smaller, regional companies, with a mandate that the never be allowed back together again. Hell, I'd probably break up the regions in such a way that some of the "baby Comcasts" would have to compete against each other.
See, your ISPs appear to be honest about the speeds you get. The rest of ours typically aren't. That's one of the things we'd like to see change. And market forces aren't going to do it.
Or we can try to get a better picture of what the national broadband picture looks like, and hopefully enact regulation that at least makes the ISPs be a little more truthful in what they offer. What good is an ISP saying they can deliver "up to" 16 Mbps down, when all they can really deliver is 4? Its nothing short of deceptive, and it needs to stop.
All they need to do is not inflate their numbers so much. If they were to give the number they knew most of their subscribers were seeing 90% of the time, then people wouldn't be so angry about their lies.
Fair enough. I don't know if you're in a position to be able to attend any of Apple's dev conferences, or iPhone conferences, but if you can, I'd suggest going. They usually have engineers and members of the approval team there that you can talk to. You might also be able to meet someone a little higher, who can exert pressure on those teams. Personally knowing some engineers helped a friend of mine get his app fixed, and out of approval hell.
So jailbreak your phone, and run whatever you want on it. The maker of a consumer electronics device is under no obligation to help you, or to make it easy for you to run your own stuff on the device. However, they are under an obligation to make sure that the device actually does what it is designed to do (in this case, be a phone).
Would it, though? The biggest key to success, that everyone is trying to emulate, is the App Store. It gives users an easy, convenient place to go to find software for their phone, and it makes the purchase process easy. Because of that, users were buying lots of iPhone software, on average more than users for other phone platforms. If the App Store weren't in place, users would have to go out of their way to try and find some place to download and buy software, and as a result wouldn't buy as much. If not as many people are buying software, then the market isn't as lucrative, and fewer devs would be attracted to the platform.
Keep in mind that Microsoft's crime was being a monopolist, and abusing that monopoly power to the detriment of competitors and consumers in the personal computer market. Apple has nowhere near a monopoly, and there is still healthy competition in the smartphone market.
Yes, you have to jailbreak it. Its not that hard, just that Apple is under no obligation to make it easy to do, or to support you if you should bork your phone trying to mod it. Afterward, you can put whatever you want on the phone. They just control what apps they decide to sell through their service, the App Store. If you want to stand up for your rights to do whatever you want with your property, then you can't really turn around and decry them for deciding what to include with their service.
Care to explain how you're going to run Windows Development tools on a platform other than Windows? And how you're going to test an app made for Windows without having Windows?
They've sold you the hardware, so you may do with your iPhone what you wish. However, they are licensing the OS and the SDK. Therefore, you need to agree to the licensing terms when you use either. If you were able to load Linux or something else onto the iPhone, and use a different SDK to develop software for it, then you wouldn't have to worry about such restrictions.
No, you are saying that we should pass a law to tell someone what to carry in their store. You are essentially asking for a law which would force McDonald's to sell tacos.
You don't have to use their App Store if you don't want to. Jailbreak your phone and use a jailbroken app store. They are providing a service with their App Store, and if you don't like the terms of that service, then you can go choose another phone, or jailbreak and choose a different store. They can't legally say you can't jailbreak your phone, but they don't have to make it easy for you, or fix your phone if you break it by modding it.
Slashdot Mirror
This award is definitely going to be cut down.
By "free market efficiency", you mean not doing it at all, because there isn't much profit in it?
I remember that also being an argument against the DMCA; that small devices like hearing aids made temporary copies in memory, and under the DMCA, would have to have the ability to support DRM for such things.
So why is it ok for cars, but not ok for your variable speed drill? Or, better yet, why should the manufacturer of a drill be obligated to provide the true speed of the drill, whereas an ISP is not obligated to provide the true average speed of the connection?
Possibly, but there are many more factors preventing competition in the ISP space, including the fact that anyone who wants to start one probably is going to have to dig up the roads to start.
You don't appear to be new here, but I'm going to go ahead and say this anyway:
CORRELATION DOES NOT IMPLY CAUSATION
That's his point: These people see that the messenger is corrupt, therefore the whole message is invalid. It doesn't matter that his sins were unrelated to the actual research, they still see this as an argument against vaccination.
You'd be surprised, but its typically the dirty hippies that are more on board with demonizing vaccines than the right wing fundamentalists.
And when they decide the best way to self-sufficiency is violent crime? Which was the point of the post you quoted.
I'm going to disagree with you on education. Having an educated populace benefits everyone, not just those with children. Well educated populations typically have lower crime rates, and higher prosperity rates. You could decide that the public shouldn't pay for it, but then there would be less of a chance for those already in lower income areas to get an education.
Which is why the way broadband is rated needs to change. Instead of selling by the theoretical maximum, which many users probably won't get, they should go by the speed that most of their customers in that tier see 90% of the time. Possibly rounded down to get a nice, even number, instead of 4.38789473 Mbps.
I personally would see that as a reasonable justification for ending Comcasat, possibly breaking them up into much smaller, regional companies, with a mandate that the never be allowed back together again. Hell, I'd probably break up the regions in such a way that some of the "baby Comcasts" would have to compete against each other.
See, your ISPs appear to be honest about the speeds you get. The rest of ours typically aren't. That's one of the things we'd like to see change. And market forces aren't going to do it.
So what you're saying is that the "Advertised" rate is a baldfaced lie. So why are we letting them get away with that?
Or we can try to get a better picture of what the national broadband picture looks like, and hopefully enact regulation that at least makes the ISPs be a little more truthful in what they offer. What good is an ISP saying they can deliver "up to" 16 Mbps down, when all they can really deliver is 4? Its nothing short of deceptive, and it needs to stop.
All they need to do is not inflate their numbers so much. If they were to give the number they knew most of their subscribers were seeing 90% of the time, then people wouldn't be so angry about their lies.
Fair enough. I don't know if you're in a position to be able to attend any of Apple's dev conferences, or iPhone conferences, but if you can, I'd suggest going. They usually have engineers and members of the approval team there that you can talk to. You might also be able to meet someone a little higher, who can exert pressure on those teams. Personally knowing some engineers helped a friend of mine get his app fixed, and out of approval hell.
That's the way it is now. It sounds like you want KFC to actually drive you over to Burger King and order your Whopper for you.
So jailbreak your phone, and run whatever you want on it. The maker of a consumer electronics device is under no obligation to help you, or to make it easy for you to run your own stuff on the device. However, they are under an obligation to make sure that the device actually does what it is designed to do (in this case, be a phone).
And what have you done to contact them about it?
Would it, though? The biggest key to success, that everyone is trying to emulate, is the App Store. It gives users an easy, convenient place to go to find software for their phone, and it makes the purchase process easy. Because of that, users were buying lots of iPhone software, on average more than users for other phone platforms. If the App Store weren't in place, users would have to go out of their way to try and find some place to download and buy software, and as a result wouldn't buy as much. If not as many people are buying software, then the market isn't as lucrative, and fewer devs would be attracted to the platform.
Keep in mind that Microsoft's crime was being a monopolist, and abusing that monopoly power to the detriment of competitors and consumers in the personal computer market. Apple has nowhere near a monopoly, and there is still healthy competition in the smartphone market.
Yes, you have to jailbreak it. Its not that hard, just that Apple is under no obligation to make it easy to do, or to support you if you should bork your phone trying to mod it. Afterward, you can put whatever you want on the phone. They just control what apps they decide to sell through their service, the App Store. If you want to stand up for your rights to do whatever you want with your property, then you can't really turn around and decry them for deciding what to include with their service.
Care to explain how you're going to run Windows Development tools on a platform other than Windows? And how you're going to test an app made for Windows without having Windows?
They've sold you the hardware, so you may do with your iPhone what you wish. However, they are licensing the OS and the SDK. Therefore, you need to agree to the licensing terms when you use either. If you were able to load Linux or something else onto the iPhone, and use a different SDK to develop software for it, then you wouldn't have to worry about such restrictions.
No, you are saying that we should pass a law to tell someone what to carry in their store. You are essentially asking for a law which would force McDonald's to sell tacos.
You don't have to use their App Store if you don't want to. Jailbreak your phone and use a jailbroken app store. They are providing a service with their App Store, and if you don't like the terms of that service, then you can go choose another phone, or jailbreak and choose a different store. They can't legally say you can't jailbreak your phone, but they don't have to make it easy for you, or fix your phone if you break it by modding it.