Maybe because europeans tend to publicize global choices when american let people and institutions sort things out for themselves, wich they may do with an lesser, equal or greater efficiency. Not saying that its true for erverything, but it may add to that feeling.
I don't think that, for example, the Pixies are in the tail of any other band, though they sell less than many other bands. Tail suppose a head and vice versa, but in music, some bands don't need another band to sell. Thats not a tentative for a rebutal or whatever, just that in this case i find that the "head and tail" analogy is not really that good.
The situation:
Alternate provider: 15 meg down, 1 meg up, phone, vod on tv via peritel, adsl tv to tv or computer (recordable tv: the open source VLC software has been put to good use via the provider, and dozens of user have programmed interfaces, wich most people use)
France telecoms (wanadoo): same offer, just replace 'open source' by 'very clumsy propriatary choices all the way, aol-like' (not sure how tv works for them, all people i know have gradually switched to Free telecoms) and count 40+13 (adsl + obligatory phone line) instead of Illiad's (free telecom) 30.
I had bought the CD version of the Encyclopedia Universalis (kind of the french britannica) wich lays unistalled, somewhere here. The articles are more litterary presented, lots of words yes, but nowhere as oriented towards facts as wikipedia. Of course wiki is not a perfectly impartial source. But i like, understand and respect its imperfections much more than those of my old encyclopedia, where personal editorial views are perceptibles, unchallenged, and not welcome.
The only thing that I see as collectivized is the right to be an editor in concurency with other interested editors. Interested is somewhat of a keyword here. So, I think that using the term "digital maoism" is neat and classy, but wrong.
Wouldn't it fit the US spirit better to ensure more diversity in their ISP, to strenghten concurence and quality of service, rather than over-regulate their 2 or 3 giants ?
The whole debate seems a little strange from here where most people can choose between enough quality providers (as one nationalized telecom company had to deregulate its lines, and in a few years time all willing ISP had ADSL2+ access to 75% of the interested population).
I wonder how much the sentiment that americans have to have mildly bad and expensive internet accesses (as it is sometime said) influes on this debate. As, if so, the whole debate would somehow misses the point. Adressing an eventual futur problem doesn't improve todays issues.
But maybe not, i gladly acknowledge i just make assumptions.
As, at the same time, maybe there is a real danger lurking beyond... and maybe being confident in my ISP and in the fact that i could change to another fine ISP if i wanted or needed too, makes me miss some real problem.
I just don't see it now. I don't say that the problem is not there, so far i've heard no good argument in favor of net neutrality other than it being supported by google and amazon. Wich as everyone knows are comited to supporting the human specie (especially in China), when telecoms companies are comited to destroy us. Common knowledge.
The music (movies aren't the same thing) outside of the RIAA is not only made of internet nerds. Its made of 98% of world's music wich hasn't precisely awaiten DVD to exist. Why occidental people listen to the remaining, musically poor, 2% is beyond my interest.
Hezbollah or Hezb-Allah (Arabic , meaning Party of God)[1] is a Lebanese militant group founded in 1982 to fight the Israeli occupation in southern Lebanon. (...)
In addition to its military wing, Hezbollah maintains a civilian arm, which runs hospitals, news services, educational facilities and participates in the Lebanese Parliament. Its Reconstruction Campaign (Jihad al-Bina) is responsible for numerous economic and infrastructural development projects in Shia-populated areas of Lebanon.
Hezbollah is regarded by many in the Arab and Muslim worlds as a legitimate resistance movement and is a recognized political party in Lebanon, where it has participated in government. However, a number of Western governments, including that of the United States, have designated it a terrorist organization, while the European Union has designated the party's external security wing, but not the organization as a whole, as a terrorist organization(*).http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah
But lets get back to our point, hezbollah and other kinds of pedophiles.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe because europeans tend to publicize global choices when american let people and institutions sort things out for themselves, wich they may do with an lesser, equal or greater efficiency. Not saying that its true for erverything, but it may add to that feeling.
But only two persons wrote teh operton.
I don't think that, for example, the Pixies are in the tail of any other band, though they sell less than many other bands. Tail suppose a head and vice versa, but in music, some bands don't need another band to sell. Thats not a tentative for a rebutal or whatever, just that in this case i find that the "head and tail" analogy is not really that good.
The situation: Alternate provider: 15 meg down, 1 meg up, phone, vod on tv via peritel, adsl tv to tv or computer (recordable tv: the open source VLC software has been put to good use via the provider, and dozens of user have programmed interfaces, wich most people use) France telecoms (wanadoo): same offer, just replace 'open source' by 'very clumsy propriatary choices all the way, aol-like' (not sure how tv works for them, all people i know have gradually switched to Free telecoms) and count 40+13 (adsl + obligatory phone line) instead of Illiad's (free telecom) 30.
I had bought the CD version of the Encyclopedia Universalis (kind of the french britannica) wich lays unistalled, somewhere here. The articles are more litterary presented, lots of words yes, but nowhere as oriented towards facts as wikipedia. Of course wiki is not a perfectly impartial source. But i like, understand and respect its imperfections much more than those of my old encyclopedia, where personal editorial views are perceptibles, unchallenged, and not welcome.
Genius. (not sure if a one word post means ban by here, but anyway it worth it, i'll be a fanmikaze)
The only thing that I see as collectivized is the right to be an editor in concurency with other interested editors. Interested is somewhat of a keyword here. So, I think that using the term "digital maoism" is neat and classy, but wrong.
If the message if that no wanabe pedophile should be without broadband, i think that they all got the memo by now.
"we developed much of what we call Modern Civilization in exactly the last 4.000.000 years" Corrected.
Wouldn't it fit the US spirit better to ensure more diversity in their ISP, to strenghten concurence and quality of service, rather than over-regulate their 2 or 3 giants ? The whole debate seems a little strange from here where most people can choose between enough quality providers (as one nationalized telecom company had to deregulate its lines, and in a few years time all willing ISP had ADSL2+ access to 75% of the interested population). I wonder how much the sentiment that americans have to have mildly bad and expensive internet accesses (as it is sometime said) influes on this debate. As, if so, the whole debate would somehow misses the point. Adressing an eventual futur problem doesn't improve todays issues. But maybe not, i gladly acknowledge i just make assumptions. As, at the same time, maybe there is a real danger lurking beyond... and maybe being confident in my ISP and in the fact that i could change to another fine ISP if i wanted or needed too, makes me miss some real problem. I just don't see it now. I don't say that the problem is not there, so far i've heard no good argument in favor of net neutrality other than it being supported by google and amazon. Wich as everyone knows are comited to supporting the human specie (especially in China), when telecoms companies are comited to destroy us. Common knowledge.
The music (movies aren't the same thing) outside of the RIAA is not only made of internet nerds. Its made of 98% of world's music wich hasn't precisely awaiten DVD to exist. Why occidental people listen to the remaining, musically poor, 2% is beyond my interest.
Hezbollah or Hezb-Allah (Arabic , meaning Party of God)[1] is a Lebanese militant group founded in 1982 to fight the Israeli occupation in southern Lebanon. (...) In addition to its military wing, Hezbollah maintains a civilian arm, which runs hospitals, news services, educational facilities and participates in the Lebanese Parliament. Its Reconstruction Campaign (Jihad al-Bina) is responsible for numerous economic and infrastructural development projects in Shia-populated areas of Lebanon. Hezbollah is regarded by many in the Arab and Muslim worlds as a legitimate resistance movement and is a recognized political party in Lebanon, where it has participated in government. However, a number of Western governments, including that of the United States, have designated it a terrorist organization, while the European Union has designated the party's external security wing, but not the organization as a whole, as a terrorist organization(*). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah But lets get back to our point, hezbollah and other kinds of pedophiles.
are you not conscious ? weed is dangerous and not a funny matter; while alcohol is funny and cool like ipods.