The Flat Earth Society
Other Discussion Boards => Philosophy, Religion & Society => Topic started by: TotesReptilian on November 25, 2017, 05:20:18 PM
-
When you go online you have certain expectations. You expect to be connected to whatever website you want. You expect that your cable or phone company isn’t messing with the data and is connecting you to all websites, applications and content you choose. You expect to be in control of your internet experience.
When you use the internet you expect Net Neutrality.
Net Neutrality is the basic principle that prohibits internet service providers like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon from speeding up, slowing down or blocking any content, applications or websites you want to use. Net Neutrality is the way that the internet has always worked.
-- https://www.savetheinternet.com/net-neutrality-what-you-need-know-now
Beware the propaganda denouncing net neutrality. It relies heavily on misrepresenting facts and straight-up lies.
Much of this propaganda is being posted on the Twitter feeds of the 3 FCC commissioners who want to remove net neutrality:
https://twitter.com/mikeofcc
https://twitter.com/AjitPaiFCC
https://twitter.com/BrendanCarrFCC
Examples of misleading articles pushing anti- net neutrality:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-net-neutrality-stirs-such-passion-1495230726
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/for-the-internet-we-need-federalism-not-anarchy/article/2641110
https://www.rollcall.com/news/opinion/internet-regulation-ted-cruz
Some common myths being pushed by anti- net neutrality propaganda:
1. The internet was perfectly fine during the "light touch" era of internet regulation, before Obama's heavy-handed net neutrality regulations.
The FCC has regulated ISP's with various net neutrality-like principles for a long time. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_in_the_United_States) The problem was that these regulations were not very explicit, consistent, and were on a shaky legal foundation. The 2010 FCC Open Internet Order (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_Open_Internet_Order_2010)'s goal was to make those principles explicit. However, it did not survive it's day in court (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verizon_Communications_Inc._v._FCC_(2014)) on a classification technicality. In order to rectify this, ISP's were classified as "common carriers", so they could be regulated under "Title II" common carrier regulations.
This representation of the issue as "light-touch" vs "Obama-era heavy regulations" is nothing but an attempt to gain support from Republican partisans.
2. "Net neutrality is the Fairness Doctrine. Will target conservative media." (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/532608358508167168)
Is anyone surprised that the Dumbass-in-Chief has no idea what net neutrality is? This doesn't make the tiniest lick of sense. If anything, the exact opposite is true. Removing net neutrality will give ISP's more power to control content served to their customers. Comcast owns MSNBC. AT&T recently announced plans to buy Time Warner, which owns CNN.
3. Net neutrality is overbearing government micromanagement of the internet.
Here are the principles of net neutrality. You can decide for yourself if it constitutes "overbearing micromanagement":
1. ISP's must disclose their basic network performance to customers. No misrepresenting network speeds or other terms of the contract.
2. No blocking anything lawful.
3. No discriminating among internet traffic. No slowing down Netflix traffic in favor of Amazon traffic, or youtube in favor of... other tubes.
Tortured metaphors in a futile effort to explain net neutrality to the technically un-inclined are highly encouraged in this thread.
-
Yeah it's bad. It's definitely a "call your congressmen" situation. I've never heard these particular defenses. I seriously doubt that anyone believes them. What it comes down to is this administration once again is trying to butt-fuck 99.9% of the country to the benefit of %.1.
The only way we can possibly stop this is by making so much noise that congress thinks their jobs are in jeopardy.
Sadly if I were a betting man I'd say this thing is going to pass.
-
Land of the free.
-
Do you think that this won't affect the rest of the internet?
-
The latest one I've heard is from libertarians who think ISPs should be allowed to manage their networks however they see fit. They also view net neutrality as coporate welfare for the content providers.
-
The latest one I've heard is from libertarians who think ISPs should be allowed to manage their networks however they see fit. They also view net neutrality as coporate welfare for the content providers.
Roads are corporate welfare for businesses! Privatize the highways!
-
The latest one I've heard is from libertarians who think ISPs should be allowed to manage their networks however they see fit. They also view net neutrality as coporate welfare for the content providers.
I wonder if these same libertarians feel the same way about water and electricity.
That's what this comes down to. Should data be considered an essential utility? I say yes.
-
Do you think that this won't affect the rest of the internet?
Yes, I'm honestly that stupid. But you already knew that.
-
I would chime in, but honestly have no knowledge on this subject for the most part
-
Fear not BHS, I've got this. Ahem:
RABBLERABBLERABBLE, HILLARY, RABBLE, OBUMMER, RABBLERABBLE, THE WAR OM CHRISTMAS!!!
-
There is no gray area here, this is just bad. If it passes, the power it gives to the few already very powerful businesses that control web content is borderline dystopian. Rarely has a business historically ever had so much power as, say, Google, this is pushing things too far.
-
There is no gray area here, this is just bad. If it passes, the power it gives to the few already very powerful businesses that control web content is borderline dystopian. Rarely has a business historically ever had so much power as, say, Google, this is pushing things too far.
Google is a small player among ISPs (for now). AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon are the big boys on the block.
-
There is no gray area here, this is just bad. If it passes, the power it gives to the few already very powerful businesses that control web content is borderline dystopian. Rarely has a business historically ever had so much power as, say, Google, this is pushing things too far.
Google is a small player among ISPs (for now). AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon are the big boys on the block.
The fact that Comcast is backing this makes it look really bad by association. Comcast has a lower approval rating than the kkk. Unfortunately they're a monopoly in my area. It's them or learn how to use carrier pigeons.
-
Murican politic is even more retarded than it's citizens. Q.e.d.
Anyway, IF the worst case happend, couldn't you just use a vpn?
-
Anyway, IF the worst case happend, couldn't you just use a vpn?
Check me if I'm wrong, but don't you still need to go through your ISP to get at your VPN?
-
Anyway, IF the worst case happend, couldn't you just use a vpn?
Check me if I'm wrong, but don't you still need to go through your ISP to get at your VPN?
Under the new rules if the isp wishes to shut down a vpn or pretty much anything else then it's totally legal. Your only recourse is to use a competitor which allows it. Oh and also that competitor doesn't exist because the isp market in America is almost always a monopoly.
-
Yeah of course, if the vpns get blocked it wouldn't work, but I think then you could still use a bridge.
But I don't think they would block vpns. And IF they wouldn't be blocked, it should work just fine, because your isp wouldn't see wether you access youtube or something else, right?
-
Murican politic is even more retarded than it's citizens. Q.e.d.
Hey, at least we don't have Theresa May over here proposing a ban on encryption.
Anyway, IF the worst case happend, couldn't you just use a vpn?
As a last resort for consumers? Sure. It tends to slow things down though, and doesn't do much to ensure an open and free market.
-
There is no gray area here, this is just bad. If it passes, the power it gives to the few already very powerful businesses that control web content is borderline dystopian. Rarely has a business historically ever had so much power as, say, Google, this is pushing things too far.
Google is a small player among ISPs (for now). AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon are the big boys on the block.
Not what I said. Google can pay to have more data alocated to its websites and less to any potential competitors. Other companies can't do that.
-
Without net neutrality the isps can make deals with some content providers to give them fast service and they can slow down the access to any competitors, or block it all together. Some people may think they wouldn't do this, but they have already done similar things in the past. AOL blocked emails critical of AOL, I think Comcast blocked gmail in Boston, and more that I can't think of at the moment. Anyway, there's no reason to trust any of these ISPs and many reasons not to trust them.
-
Anyway, IF the worst case happend, couldn't you just use a vpn?
Check me if I'm wrong, but don't you still need to go through your ISP to get at your VPN?
Under the new rules if the isp wishes to shut down a vpn or pretty much anything else then it's totally legal. Your only recourse is to use a competitor which allows it. Oh and also that competitor doesn't exist because the isp market in America is almost always a monopoly.
Reminds me of my school. We had access to wifi but they had blocked pretty much everything on the internet so we started using VPNs. At some point they figured out we were doing that and the assholes started blocking the VPNs >:(
-
Murican politic is even more retarded than it's citizens. Q.e.d.
Hey, at least we don't have Theresa May over here proposing a ban on encryption.
You serious? Source?
-
Murican politic is even more retarded than it's citizens. Q.e.d.
Hey, at least we don't have Theresa May over here proposing a ban on encryption.
You serious? Source?
Sort of. I was exaggerating slightly.
As I understand it, she wants to limit what people are allowed to use encryption for, and/or to force companies to build a government backdoor into services that use encryption. All in the name of fighting terrorism of course.
http://www.businessinsider.com/home-secretary-amber-rudd-real-people-dont-need-end-to-end-encryption-terrorists-2017-8
https://boingboing.net/2017/06/04/theresa-may-king-canute.html
(Keep in mind that I don't keep a close eye on British politics, so I may be a bit out of the loop.)
-
As far as I know, big hard drive companies already have a backdoor built in their harddrives, so the NSA can access the data in a snowden-like case.
-
Right, and Apple can unlock anybody's iPhone whenever law enforcement wants.
-
Right, and Apple can unlock anybody's iPhone whenever law enforcement wants.
Actually, there was that big law suit when the fbi wanted apple to unlock an iphone for them and they didn't do it.
-
As far as I know, big hard drive companies already have a backdoor built in their harddrives, so the NSA can access the data in a snowden-like case.
I've heard rumors to that effect (mostly about Intel and AMD), but I have no idea if they are true or not. It wouldn't surprise me though.
-
As far as I know, big hard drive companies already have a backdoor built in their harddrives, so the NSA can access the data in a snowden-like case.
I've heard rumors to that effect (mostly about Intel and AMD), but I have no idea if they are true or not. It wouldn't surprise me though.
I found some stuff about it when I was researching about the dark net. I think (not 100% sure) that some big companies actually admit(ted) it.
But yeah, if you google search for "encrypted harddrive backdoor" you're most like directly & permanentely ond the nsa watchlist :D
-
Right, and Apple can unlock anybody's iPhone whenever law enforcement wants.
Actually, there was that big law suit when the fbi wanted apple to unlock an iphone for them and they didn't do it.
Ummm... Yeah, I know. Apple said that they designed the encryption so that even they couldn't break it.
-
Right, and Apple can unlock anybody's iPhone whenever law enforcement wants.
Actually, there was that big law suit when the fbi wanted apple to unlock an iphone for them and they didn't do it.
Ummm... Yeah, I know. Apple said that they designed the encryption so that even they couldn't break it.
Hmm... I never thought of Apple as a company with the decency to do that...
-
They lied.
-
They lied.
I don't think so.
But obviously apples encryption and especially their fingerprint sensors etc are not save against the nsa. But that usually shouldnt be too big of a concern, unless you are planting bombs somewhere.
-
Oh, the fingerprint sensor got cracked within a few weeks of being released. An oversimplified version was shown in the Ant-Man movie. It's the PIN that causes the problem because you can set the security to wipe your phone after so many wrong entries in a row.
-
They lied.
I don't think so.
But obviously apples encryption and especially their fingerprint sensors etc are not save against the nsa. But that usually shouldnt be too big of a concern, unless you are planting bombs somewhere.
It is a big concern in a country that is supposed to be against that sort of thing. In the US the govt is not supposed to nose around in anyone's business without probable cause.
-
Right, and Apple can unlock anybody's iPhone whenever law enforcement wants.
Actually, there was that big law suit when the fbi wanted apple to unlock an iphone for them and they didn't do it.
Ummm... Yeah, I know. Apple said that they designed the encryption so that even they couldn't break it.
Hmm... I never thought of Apple as a company with the decency to do that...
I would not be surprised if it was only publicity that Apple would not co-operate with the FBI but behind the scenes they told the FBI told all they needed to know.
-
Oh, the fingerprint sensor got cracked within a few weeks of being released. An oversimplified version was shown in the Ant-Man movie. It's the PIN that causes the problem because you can set the security to wipe your phone after so many wrong entries in a row.
If I remember correctly the encryption was never the problem. That appears to be solid. What the FBI wanted was a way to reset the try count on unlocking it. The problem is that that tool would give the FBI a way to break into pretty much anyone's iPhone.
You can look at it as an integrity move on Apple's part. But it's also self serving. People want to believe that their data is secure. If the iPhone is effectively cracked then they'll lose customers.
I wouldn't worry a whole lot about Trump fucking with encryption. Mostly because I seriously doubt that he understands what encryption is.
-
I wouldn't worry a whole lot about Trump fucking with encryption. Mostly because I seriously doubt that he understands what encryption is.
I doubt that Trump understands what net neutrality is either, but that doesn't seem to stop him from wanting it to go away.
-
He wants to get rid of anything Obama's administration did.
-
Murican politic is even more retarded than it's citizens. Q.e.d.
Anyway, IF the worst case happend, couldn't you just use a vpn?
I might be wrong about this, but I don't think a vpn would solve the problem. It would stop your ISP from knowing where you went on the net, but you would still be accessing the websites of companies that could be affected by the speed throttling. If you have Comcast and they decide to throttle this site, packets coming from this site would move slower through its network. All the while, Comcast boosted the speed of the other site, meaning people would be more likely to go there since the pages wouldn't take a 30 seconds to load.
Now, I could be completely off base there and it may take the customer's network signal to recognize where the packets came from, thus removing all the speed changes done by the ISP. I also don't think an ISP could ban vpns because a lot of companies and government entities use vpn accounts for their remote staff. But most towns have 1 or 2 choices of providers, so the ISPs could really do whatever the fuck they wanted.
-
I might be wrong about this, but I don't think a vpn would solve the problem. It would stop your ISP from knowing where you went on the net, but you would still be accessing the websites of companies that could be affected by the speed throttling. If you have Comcast and they decide to throttle this site, packets coming from this site would move slower through its network. All the while, Comcast boosted the speed of the other site, meaning people would be more likely to go there since the pages wouldn't take a 30 seconds to load.
Oh, but if you use a VPN the ISP doesn't see which site you access, neither does the site you access know which ISP you are using. So they have no way to drossel your speed, especially because your traffic with VPN is encrypted.
-
Right, but they aren't throttling speeds at the person level. Rather it's at the content provider level. So they are throttling the speeds of sites right out the gate.
-
Right, but they aren't throttling speeds at the person level. Rather it's at the content provider level. So they are throttling the speeds of sites right out the gate.
What? They are not at the gate of youtube etc. The gate they could see is the one of the VPN provider. What is behind that gate (e.g. youtube) would be past their vision.
As far as I know the hierarchie is like that:
You -> ISP -> VPN -> site you access (and then all that backwards)
-
I stand corrected. However, they could simply apply the throttle to VPNs in general.
Edit: They could even take it one step further. They could set up their own VPN hosting service, provide a fast lane to that service and throttle all other VPN providers. That way they can still control the speed of sites going through their fast vpn and can make all others trying to bypass their speed setup suffer.
-
(https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/net_neturality1-e1509289851528.png?w=831)
We are about to be awesome like the Portuguese!
-
At least myspace is free!
-
As long as pornhub and xvideos would stay free it's all good in my opinion.
-
I think there's a reddit sub freaking out about porn.
-
I think there's a reddit sub freaking out about porn.
Lol, fucking degenerates.
-
I think there's a reddit sub freaking out about porn.
Lol, fucking degenerates.
No form of entertainment grows a medium faster in the mainstream than porn.
-
I think there's a reddit sub freaking out about porn.
Lol, fucking degenerates.
No form of entertainment grows a medium faster in the mainstream than porn.
I didn't claim different.
-
(https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/net_neturality1-e1509289851528.png?w=831)
We are about to be awesome like the Portuguese!
Wtf is this atrocity?
-
(https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/net_neturality1-e1509289851528.png?w=831)
We are about to be awesome like the Portuguese!
Wtf is this atrocity?
This is how internet service works in Portugal. There is no net neutrality there so ISP's can block whatever they want and charge you to unblock it.
-
(https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/net_neturality1-e1509289851528.png?w=831)
We are about to be awesome like the Portuguese!
Wtf is this atrocity?
This is how internet service works in Portugal. There is no net neutrality there so ISP's can block whatever they want and charge you to unblock it.
FFS.
-
(https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/net_neturality1-e1509289851528.png?w=831)
We are about to be awesome like the Portuguese!
Wtf is this atrocity?
This is how internet service works in Portugal. There is no net neutrality there so ISP's can block whatever they want and charge you to unblock it.
In the interest of heading off any misinformation:
This is just a mockup of how ISP's could bundle internet service without net neutrality. Here is the example from Portugal (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DNGlrABUIAAr9RO.jpg). Portugal DOES have net neutrality via the EU, but from what I can tell, there are exceptions for mobile carriers that make the above example legal.
The US's Open Internet Order also contains some exceptions for mobile carriers. I'm not entirely clear on whether it would allow for the above to happen though. However, what IS clear is that repealing net neutrality would definitely allow any ISP to bundle internet like the above example, mobile-carrier or not. It wouldn't happen immediately, but it almost certainly would move in that direction long-term.
-
My guess is that if there are exceptions for mobile, it's most likely because of the limited infrastructure and bandwidth at the time that the regulations were drafted.
-
(https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/net_neturality1-e1509289851528.png?w=831)
We are about to be awesome like the Portuguese!
Wtf is this atrocity?
This is how internet service works in Portugal. There is no net neutrality there so ISP's can block whatever they want and charge you to unblock it.
In the interest of heading off any misinformation:
This is just a mockup of how ISP's could bundle internet service without net neutrality. Here is the example from Portugal (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DNGlrABUIAAr9RO.jpg). Portugal DOES have net neutrality via the EU, but from what I can tell, there are exceptions for mobile carriers that make the above example legal.
The US's Open Internet Order also contains some exceptions for mobile carriers. I'm not entirely clear on whether it would allow for the above to happen though. However, what IS clear is that repealing net neutrality would definitely allow any ISP to bundle internet like the above example, mobile-carrier or not. It wouldn't happen immediately, but it almost certainly would move in that direction long-term.
Gah!!!
That's what I get for not fact checking first.
-
Gah!!!
That's what I get for not fact checking first.
No worries. The premise of the warning was still correct.
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/935667586083278849/UH4NZ90D?format=jpg&name=600x314)
Nazis Want Net Neutrality Repealed to 'Unleash a Plague of Frogs on Twitter.'
lol
http://www.newsweek.com/nazis-want-net-neutrality-repealed-because-they-think-it-will-help-them-harass-724003
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/935667586083278849/UH4NZ90D?format=jpg&name=600x314)
Nazis Want Net Neutrality Repealed to 'Unleash a Plague of Frogs on Twitter.'
lol
http://www.newsweek.com/nazis-want-net-neutrality-repealed-because-they-think-it-will-help-them-harass-724003
Let my Pepes go!
-
How do they think net neutrality being repealed would help them? Hell, net neutrality helps protect their preferred social media site, Gab, from the likes of Facebook and Twitter.
-
How do they think net neutrality being repealed would help them?
It pisses off the libtard-beta-sjw-cucks. This is far more important than their own well being.
-
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/12/net-neutrality-activists-just-took-over-reddit-with-protest-posts/
If any of you are redditers you should do one for your state or upvote the one that already exists for your state.
-
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/12/net-neutrality-protests-start-thursday-how-to-find-one-near-you/
If anyone wants to protest this. Since the entire country can't fly to Washington the plan is to protest Verizon stores since the current head of the fcc is a former lobbyist for Verizon.
-
I'm gonna protest in my front yard, probably do just as much good.
-
I already protested by switching to my municipality internet, and going from 6 Mbps to 250 Mbps while saving $15 a month (as long as I stay within city limits since municipalities aren't allowed to offer net outside of their borders). I also told the Spectrum salesperson to shove it when they came to my door by telling them they can't possibly compete with the service I'm getting.
-
I don't live in a city, so even if they get that going down here I'll probably still be stuck with Century Link.
-
I don't live in a city, so even if they get that going down here I'll probably still be stuck with Century Link.
Yep, even if you were just outside of one, my congresswoman made it so that close city wouldn't be allowed to offer internet outside of their city limits. Marsha Blackburn did this despite Tennessee having 2 cities offering broadband well above the rates other providers are offering and both wanting to expand beyond their city limits.
-
I just hope it's not too difficult for the next government to undo this shit.
-
I just hope it's not too difficult for the next government to undo this shit.
This is what government has come down to . . . ideological badminton.
-
I just hope it's not too difficult for the next government to undo this shit.
This is what government has come down to . . . ideological badminton.
Here's an idea: stop voting for Republicans. That should prevent the backwards part of this back-and-forth.
-
I just hope it's not too difficult for the next government to undo this shit.
This is what government has come down to . . . ideological badminton.
Here's an idea: stop voting for Republicans. That should prevent the backwards part of this back-and-forth.
You, sir, are a problem solver.
-
You, sir, are a problem solver.
If only everyone would just listen to me, we wouldn't have to argue.
-
You, sir, are a problem solver.
If only everyone would just listen to me, we wouldn't have to argue.
Trump could say that, too.
-
You, sir, are a problem solver.
If only everyone would just listen to me, we wouldn't have to argue.
Trump could say that, too.
Yeah, but I have good ideas. Trump has bad ideas.
-
Me good - You bad.
-
Our government has always gone from one backlash to the next. Sometimes good things happen during and we get to keep them, sometimes bad things happen and we have to fix them eventually.
-
Our government has always gone from one backlash to the next. Sometimes good things happen during and we get to keep them, sometimes bad things happen and we have to fix them eventually.
When was the last time you REALLY liked a decision in the US? You know, the last time you went "Fuck yes, I waited forever for that to happen!". Honest question, I just want to see people's opinions on that.
-
Our government has always gone from one backlash to the next. Sometimes good things happen during and we get to keep them, sometimes bad things happen and we have to fix them eventually.
When was the last time you REALLY liked a decision in the US? You know, the last time you went "Fuck yes, I waited forever for that to happen!". Honest question, I just want to see people's opinions on that.
Net neutrality.
Obamacare, sort of. Good idea. The implementation needs more work.
Marriage equality.
This last one is a first world problem, required restaurants to finally put the damn calories on the menu.
There's been disappointments. Probably the worst one is Citizens United. Somewhere down the list is a total failure to defend our elections against partisan gerrymandering.
-
required restaurants to finally put the damn calories on the menu.
Why the fuck should they be required to do that.
Damn fat muricans thinking they would lose weight that way. Ridiculous.
-
required restaurants to finally put the damn calories on the menu.
Why the fuck should they be required to do that.
Damn fat muricans thinking they would lose weight that way. Ridiculous.
I don't know what to tell you. That's just basic thermodynamics...
-
required restaurants to finally put the damn calories on the menu.
Why the fuck should they be required to do that.
Damn fat muricans thinking they would lose weight that way. Ridiculous.
I don't know what to tell you. That's just basic thermodynamics...
Reading calories makes you lose fat? Nice thermodynamics you got there.
-
required restaurants to finally put the damn calories on the menu.
Why the fuck should they be required to do that.
Damn fat muricans thinking they would lose weight that way. Ridiculous.
I don't know what to tell you. That's just basic thermodynamics...
Reading calories makes you lose fat? Nice thermodynamics you got there.
You really miss disputeone don't you?
-
required restaurants to finally put the damn calories on the menu.
Why the fuck should they be required to do that.
Damn fat muricans thinking they would lose weight that way. Ridiculous.
I don't know what to tell you. That's just basic thermodynamics...
Reading calories makes you lose fat? Nice thermodynamics you got there.
You really miss disputeone don't you?
Yep, because even him was smarter than you :/
Edit: but seriously, the calory idea is retarded.
-
required restaurants to finally put the damn calories on the menu.
Why the fuck should they be required to do that.
Damn fat muricans thinking they would lose weight that way. Ridiculous.
I don't know what to tell you. That's just basic thermodynamics...
Reading calories makes you lose fat? Nice thermodynamics you got there.
You really miss disputeone don't you?
Yep, because even him was smarter than you :/
Edit: but seriously, the calory idea is retarded.
ok
-
The calorie thing is so that you can make an informed choice about what you eat, it is not retarted. Also, it is not a difficult thing for chain restaurants to do, since they try to keep their ingredients and cooking methods exactly the same. It may be more difficult for restaurants that are not part of a chain to do it.
-
I'm sure user is aware of that. He's probably just drunk and wants to pick fights with people.
-
The calorie thing is so that you can make an informed choice about what you eat, it is not retarted. Also, it is not a difficult thing for chain restaurants to do, since they try to keep their ingredients and cooking methods exactly the same. It may be more difficult for restaurants that are not part of a chain to do it.
'Informed choice about what you eat' like seriously?
You fucking know what you order.
But yeah... keep doing no sports, eat fatty fast food and drink soft drinks 24/7, but demand to know the amount of calories in your meal at the restaurants...
It's not like humans have a brain and can listen to their body.
Counting calories over more than a few days is not necessary, not even depending on whether you want to lose gain or sustain weight.
-
Well, why are you so against it? If people want to know if a meal has 12000 calories in it, they should be able to find out.
-
Well, why are you so against it? If people want to know if a meal has 12000 calories in it, they should be able to find out.
It's not like you don't realize whether you eat 1000 or 10000 kj. People should listen to their bodies, not what amount of calories they think they eat because
1) You don't really know how much calories you need (depends on genetic as well as how much you move, your age etc. No way to really calculate it).
2) By only eating after calory-count you ignore your body which is obviously not good in the long run.
3) If you just eat fewer calories but not healthy in general, good chance of having/gettiing some deficiency, plus feeling hungry all the time.
4) Counting calories is a good way into an eating disorder
5) It's not like calory counts in restaurants would be precise at all.
6) people (at least where I live) exactely know what's healthy and what's not, or if they don't they can easily google it. It's just they don't care.
...
Also, I'm not saying restaurants shouldn't be allowed to print calories on their menu. I'm just saying it's retarded to make them having to print it.
-
Well, why are you so against it? If people want to know if a meal has 12000 calories in it, they should be able to find out.
It's not like you don't realize whether you eat 1000 or 10000 kj. People should listen to their bodies, not what amount of calories they think they eat because
1) You don't really know how much calories you need (depends on genetic as well as how much you move, your age etc. No way to really calculate it).
2) By only eating after calory-count you ignore your body which is obviously not good in the long run.
3) If you just eat fewer calories but not healthy in general, good chance of having/gettiing some deficiency, plus feeling hungry all the time.
4) Counting calories is a good way into an eating disorder
5) It's not like calory counts in restaurants would be precise at all.
6) people (at least where I live) exactely know what's healthy and what's not, or if they don't they can easily google it. It's just they don't care.
...
Also, I'm not saying restaurants shouldn't be allowed to print calories on their menu. I'm just saying it's retarded to make them having to print it.
Actually, listening to your body is a dumb idea.
For example, a typical 'dinner' at Maccas would encompass more than half your basal metabolic rate of calories. When people are confronted with this number, some may choose to forgo 'upsizing' or switching their soda for water instead. Also because even the buns are laden with sugar and stripped of fibre at most fast food outlets, if you listen to your body, it wont tell you to 'stop' because you've eaten 'x' calories. It will mostly encourage you to keep eating.
A simple test.
Get a bowl of full fat greek yoghurt. Put plain, unsweetened, protein powder in it. Try and eat the whole bowl (a good half kilo). It may be a challenge and you will feel full afterwards (because of the amount of fat and protein)
Now try adding a delicious sweetened protein powder. You will want seconds! Maybe even thirds! It seems unnatural you could eat 100+ grams of protein and hundreds of grams of fat so easily in one sitting and still have an appetite but if its sweetened, it can override your bodies rationale
So sometimes it's better, not to listen to our bodies and rely on the numbers.
-
Factory fast food knows exactly what is in their cookie cutter assembly line offerings.
The food is engineered down to the milligram to trigger consumption.
They put in exact amounts of sugar, salt, fat, protein and pickles to make you crave the next bite. The food scientists in the test kitchens know what the food offerings are constructed from. They know the calorie count +/- 1%.
There is no reason they can't just let us know what we're eating.
-
Factory fast food joints already publish their nutritional information. It's the mom & pop places that don't (and would probably have a hard time even if they wanted to).
-
How many calories in a gay wedding cake?
-
With net neutrality going away, we may never be able to Google the answer.
-
With net neutrality going away, we may never be able to Google the answer.
Why does America 'decide' net neutralities existence? Surely more enlightened countries could just Google the answer for you?
The way you talk, it's like you guys rule the whole world. Last I checked, I don't get to vote in your elections. Maybe if America wants the authority of policing the world, the polls for your President should be open to the worlds audience.
-
Factory fast food joints already publish their nutritional information. It's the mom & pop places that don't (and would probably have a hard time even if they wanted to).
Factory fast food is as predictable as a can of chili. known contents.
Mom & Pop cook on-the-fly. An extra dollop of butter to mount a sauce adds 100 calories. It's custom work. I've been to M&P joints that serve larger portions to bigger guests.
How do they label that?
Aren't there more pressing issues government can try to solve?
-
With net neutrality going away, we may never be able to Google the answer.
Why does America 'decide' net neutralities existence?
Because America invented the internet.
The way you talk, it's like you guys rule the whole world. Last I checked, I don't get to vote in your elections. Maybe if America wants the authority of policing the world, the polls for your President should be open to the worlds audience.
The net neutrality that we're talking about only refers to how US internet providers and carriers handle internet traffic. Internet traffic that doesn't go through any US internet carriers will probably not be affected.
-
Factory fast food joints already publish their nutritional information. It's the mom & pop places that don't (and would probably have a hard time even if they wanted to).
Factory fast food is as predictable as a can of chili. known contents.
Mom & Pop cook on-the-fly. An extra dollop of butter to mount a sauce adds 100 calories. It's custom work. I've been to M&P joints that serve larger portions to bigger guests.
How do they label that?
Aren't there more pressing issues government can try to solve?
Are you suggesting that the health and welfare of its citizens should not be a pressing issue for government?
-
With net neutrality going away, we may never be able to Google the answer.
Why does America 'decide' net neutralities existence?
Because America invented the internet.
The way you talk, it's like you guys rule the whole world. Last I checked, I don't get to vote in your elections. Maybe if America wants the authority of policing the world, the polls for your President should be open to the worlds audience.
The net neutrality that we're talking about only refers to how US internet providers and carriers handle internet traffic. Internet traffic that doesn't go through any US internet carriers will probably not be affected.
We should charge foreigners double so we can have free internet.
-
Factory fast food joints already publish their nutritional information. It's the mom & pop places that don't (and would probably have a hard time even if they wanted to).
Factory fast food is as predictable as a can of chili. known contents.
Mom & Pop cook on-the-fly. An extra dollop of butter to mount a sauce adds 100 calories. It's custom work. I've been to M&P joints that serve larger portions to bigger guests.
How do they label that?
Aren't there more pressing issues government can try to solve?
Are you suggesting that the health and welfare of its citizens should not be a pressing issue for government?
Yes.
Government does not have citizens.
It is the other way around.
That concept is anathema to the rest of the disk.
-
With net neutrality going away, we may never be able to Google the answer.
Why does America 'decide' net neutralities existence? Surely more enlightened countries could just Google the answer for you?
The way you talk, it's like you guys rule the whole world. Last I checked, I don't get to vote in your elections. Maybe if America wants the authority of policing the world, the polls for your President should be open to the worlds audience.
We may not be able to afford to ask you to google it for us.
-
Factory fast food joints already publish their nutritional information. It's the mom & pop places that don't (and would probably have a hard time even if they wanted to).
Factory fast food is as predictable as a can of chili. known contents.
Mom & Pop cook on-the-fly. An extra dollop of butter to mount a sauce adds 100 calories. It's custom work. I've been to M&P joints that serve larger portions to bigger guests.
How do they label that?
Aren't there more pressing issues government can try to solve?
Are you suggesting that the health and welfare of its citizens should not be a pressing issue for government?
Yes.
Government does not have citizens.
It is the other way around.
That concept is anathema to the rest of the disk.
*sigh* Are you suggesting that the health and welfare of a nation's citizens should not be a pressing issue for that nation's government?
Is that better, you pedantic prick?
-
In other news, a whole bunch of techies have signed a 43 page letter stating the proposed net neutrality repeal is based on a fundamentally flawed understanding of how the net works. This letter was signed by people who created the backbone of the internet.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/12/net-neutrality-repeal-based-on-false-description-of-internet-inventors-say/
-
Why do americans try to have sort of democratic institutes, when they anyway just sell to the highest bidder?
If you ask me, they should remove the president and put the 5 riches persons in charge. Wouldn't change anything anyway, so it wouldn't matter but at least be more honest.
-
Why do americans try to have sort of democratic institutes, when they anyway just sell to the highest bidder?
If you ask me, they should remove the president and put the 5 riches persons in charge. Wouldn't change anything anyway, so it wouldn't matter but at least be more honest.
Because while hyperbole is fun from a distance, it isn't great to base your government off of it.
-
With net neutrality going away, we may never be able to Google the answer.
Why does America 'decide' net neutralities existence? Surely more enlightened countries could just Google the answer for you?
Dear Abby,
Could you google the following for me please? I have Comcast. :(
* Shark laser attachment
* Do penguins taste good
* How fast can penguins run
* callate cabron english translation
Your loyal reader,
Totes
-
Why do americans try to have sort of democratic institutes, when they anyway just sell to the highest bidder?
If you ask me, they should remove the president and put the 5 riches persons in charge. Wouldn't change anything anyway, so it wouldn't matter but at least be more honest.
Because while hyperbole is fun from a distance, it isn't great to base your government off of it.
Not even sure if it was hyperbole to be honest.
-
Factory fast food joints already publish their nutritional information. It's the mom & pop places that don't (and would probably have a hard time even if they wanted to).
Factory fast food is as predictable as a can of chili. known contents.
Mom & Pop cook on-the-fly. An extra dollop of butter to mount a sauce adds 100 calories. It's custom work. I've been to M&P joints that serve larger portions to bigger guests.
How do they label that?
Aren't there more pressing issues government can try to solve?
Are you suggesting that the health and welfare of its citizens should not be a pressing issue for government?
Yes.
Government does not have citizens.
It is the other way around.
That concept is anathema to the rest of the disk.
*sigh* Are you suggesting that the health and welfare of a nation's citizens should not be a pressing issue for that nation's government?
Is that better, you pedantic prick?
Governments job should be to write the rules and regulations,
not actively own and run the whole operation. , pedantic yes, but prick? You hurt my feelings.
-
Why do americans try to have sort of democratic institutes, when they anyway just sell to the highest bidder?
If you ask me, they should remove the president and put the 5 riches persons in charge. Wouldn't change anything anyway, so it wouldn't matter but at least be more honest.
Because while hyperbole is fun from a distance, it isn't great to base your government off of it.
Not even sure if it was hyperbole to be honest.
It's a constant tug of war between corporate and public interest. It looks bad right now, but there are good people on the other end of the rope. It doesn't pay to be fatalistic.
-
Live stream of the FCC vote to ass rape internet consumers.
Well here we go.
God damn this jackass looks smug.
-
I've never seen the comments fly by in the live chat part of youtube so fast. I feel like I'm watching a kernel compile.
-
Have you checked to see if your identity was used by someone else to make comments about Net Neutrality? https://ag.ny.gov/FakeComments
-
I'd be surprised if it weren't. Just because I have a name so common that it's almost not worth hiding. It's on the same level of common as "John Smith".
-
Have you checked to see if your identity was used by someone else to make comments about Net Neutrality? https://ag.ny.gov/FakeComments
I tried but the search page never actually loaded. I'll try again when I'm not on a phone.
-
Well, they canceled net neutrality anyway.
-
RIP
Remaining options:
1. The courts.
2. Vote out the corporate stooges who support this in 2018 and 2020.
3. Constitutional amendment via state legislatures.
-
https://www.wired.com/story/after-fcc-vote-net-neutrality-fight-moves-to-courts-congress/
There's hope. It'll just take a while.
Not treating data like a utility just isn't practical for a high tech economy. So I don't see how this can stick in the long run.
But for now #maga!
-
https://www.wired.com/story/after-fcc-vote-net-neutrality-fight-moves-to-courts-congress/
There's hope. It'll just take a while.
Not treating data like a utility just isn't practical for a high tech economy. So I don't see how this can stick in the long run.
But for now #maga!
Hopefully the court issues a stay. Preferably one that lasts until 2020.
-
I hold no hope for this in Congress. This is largely seen as a partisan issue by the ones in power, even if it isn't seen that way by us plebians they rule over. It has Obama's name on it, therefore no republican can support it.
-
I looked up my name on that link SCG. It doesn't appear my identity was used to post fake comments, but of the 11 comments that matched my name, only 1 was against the repeal. The 10 that were for the repeal had 3 different texts to them, meaning most were copy & paste jobs. A dutiful government agency would have at least delayed a vote since there does appear to be an issue with authenticity.
-
I doubt he cares. At one point the vote was interrupted by a bomb threat. They sweeped the area and he immediately got back to doing his corporate master's bidding.
If people are trying to blow him up I'm pretty sure he's aware of how unpopular this is.
-
If unlimited data is $50 per month,
why shouldn't I be able to buy limited data for $10 per month?
-
If unlimited data is $50 per month,
why shouldn't I be able to buy limited data for $10 per month?
That is not what net neutrality is.
-
If unlimited data is $50 per month,
why shouldn't I be able to buy limited data for $10 per month?
That is not what net neutrality is.
Give me the Net Neutrality for Dummies version. please.
(emphasis on 'for Dummies'.)
-
If unlimited data is $50 per month,
why shouldn't I be able to buy limited data for $10 per month?
That is not what net neutrality is.
Give me the Net Neutrality for Dummies version. please.
(emphasis on 'for Dummies'.)
Your ISPN decide they want even more money. So they create a video portal.
Now, since youtube is the biggest enemy - baaaam - you get only 1mbps on youtube, except if you pay $15 per month extra.
Or: your ISPN doesnt want you to jerk your dick, but they know you can't stop it.
Boom - you need to get the porn+ XXL data package for only $99...
-
(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSldCIyCvexfI-_pitepcbkgJ6ctk3oKgx52awWajpS6C0JwVqe8iZrS6J-HQ)
This brain fart idea of his has negative ramifications even for Oz. Thanks.
C'mon Pence. The world is counting on you.
(https://www.bleedingcool.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/STL056787-600x934.jpg)
-
I looked up my name on that link SCG. It doesn't appear my identity was used to post fake comments, but of the 11 comments that matched my name, only 1 was against the repeal. The 10 that were for the repeal had 3 different texts to them, meaning most were copy & paste jobs. A dutiful government agency would have at least delayed a vote since there does appear to be an issue with authenticity.
Report it.
-
If unlimited data is $50 per month,
why shouldn't I be able to buy limited data for $10 per month?
That is not what net neutrality is.
Give me the Net Neutrality for Dummies version. please.
(emphasis on 'for Dummies'.)
Your ISPN decide they want even more money. So they create a video portal.
Now, since youtube is the biggest enemy - baaaam - you get only 1mbps on youtube, except if you pay $15 per month extra.
Or: your ISPN doesnt want you to jerk your dick, but they know you can't stop it.
Boom - you need to get the porn+ XXL data package for only $99...
There's pornography on the interweb?
Does Net Neutrality address competition?
-
If unlimited data is $50 per month,
why shouldn't I be able to buy limited data for $10 per month?
That is not what net neutrality is.
Give me the Net Neutrality for Dummies version. please.
(emphasis on 'for Dummies'.)
Your ISPN decide they want even more money. So they create a video portal.
Now, since youtube is the biggest enemy - baaaam - you get only 1mbps on youtube, except if you pay $15 per month extra.
Or: your ISPN doesnt want you to jerk your dick, but they know you can't stop it.
Boom - you need to get the porn+ XXL data package for only $99...
There's pornography on the interweb?
Does Net Neutrality address competition?
Don't worry, the competition will also abuse this.
-
A WAN is kind of like the road connecting houses and businesses and recreational areas. It costs to lay them down, and once it's done it's done, removing them and replacing will cost even more. The WAN's are owned by the ISP's. Once you are connected to a WAN and pay the ISP it's costly to switch over to another, because you need to replace your current cable connecting you to the WAN's. It's especially tough in rural areas, where there is often only one WAN owned by a single ISP. You'd need to pay another ISP to lay down a whole new "road" from one of their own WAN's in order to switch. Realistically, and depending on the distance to the closest bigger city, most people in a small town needs to work together to switch the ISP. It's just as if roads where owned by corporations. Therefore, ISP's almost have monopoly over a lot of their customers.
-
Net neutrality or net neutrality, nothing addresses competition amongst ISPs. Net neutrality does address competition on the internet, saying everyone on the internet should be on the same playing field. This way we can get the next Netflix to come up and replace it with something better, instead of an ISP artificially inflating it's worth and killing any startup competitor.
-
They know many of the comments in favor of the repeal were fake, but they don't care.
Did y'all see Ajit Pai doing the Harlem Shake with the pizzagate chick? lol
-
Did y'all see Ajit Pai doing the Harlem Shake with the pizzagate chick? lol
Lol what? Pls explain.
-
Ajit Pai made a video about "7 things you can still do on the internet after net neutrality (though they only mentioned 6 things), which was just a bunch of dead memes and overall insulting to the common internet user. The original video has already been removed, but lots of people have re-uploaded it.
-
Here's an article explaining it http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/365061-harlem-shake-creators-threaten-to-sue-over-fcc-chairmans-anti The woman on the right side of (from the viewer's perspective) Ajit is the pizzagate chick. Yesterday she deleted or made private her pizzagate videos.
-
I LOVE IT! Link is on my desktop now! NET NEUTRALITY! This is the fertile foundation for healthy discourse within every community - scientific or Star Trek!
Make this big in the internet! Show it your friends and relink it if you are on social media!
-
Ajit Pai made a video about "7 things you can still do on the internet after net neutrality (though they only mentioned 6 things), which was just a bunch of dead memes and overall insulting to the common internet user. The original video has already been removed, but lots of people have re-uploaded it.
Yep. He's really channeling his inner Martin Shkrelli.
-
I wonder if Pai legitimately believes the bullshit he is spewing or if he is just saying words that could sound correct but believes differently. At least Blackburn has come out to say net neutrality needs to be enshrined by Congress.
-
If unlimited data is $50 per month,
why shouldn't I be able to buy limited data for $10 per month?
That is not what net neutrality is.
Give me the Net Neutrality for Dummies version. please.
(emphasis on 'for Dummies'.)
As short as I can make it. Here goes.
You know how the power company doesn't care what you plug into your outlets? That's the same thing we want for the internet service providers.
-
As short as I can make it. Here goes.
You know how the power company doesn't care what you plug into your outlets? That's the same thing we want for the internet service providers.
You're afraid you can no longer use internet on your mac?
-
You know how the power company doesn't care what you plug into your outlets? That's the same thing we want for the internet service providers.
I think for your metaphor, "neutrality" would mean the power company has to charge you the same amount whether you've plugged in a nightlight or a klieg lamp.
-
You know how the power company doesn't care what you plug into your outlets? That's the same thing we want for the internet service providers.
I think for your metaphor, "neutrality" would mean the power company has to charge you the same amount whether you've plugged in a nightlight or a klieg lamp.
Only if they pull the same amount of juice!
-
OH, I have one.
You have an ipad, and you have a galaxy tab. Both require the exact same amount of electricity and time to charge. The company you buy electricity from has made a deal with Apple, and they charge you 15 cents more to charge the galaxy tab and it takes twice as long.
I DON'T KNOW.
-
To expand on the power company metaphor:
Let's say Rocky Mountain Power(RMP). Knows what I plug in where and can selectively charge more or less or even deny service to some device.
Here are some of the interesting ways RMP can now screw me over to make more money. These are all analogous to things that telecoms have done and consumers have had to fight way to hard to stop.
RMP straight out refuses to power any central air conditioning unit but their own which they will only rent.
RMP offers a power plan for most devices used in my house but for some special items, like toasters, there's a separate plan with a minimum charge whether or not I actually use the toasters that month.
RMP will give a discount to power products made by their corporate partners. Which puts other manufacturers at an unfair disadvantage.
RMP is a monopoly in my area so my only recourse is angry letters to congress. The free market will not protect my interests here because of the nature of how a utility works.
-
It's retardedly ridiculous to expand a metaphor further than the actual issue.
-
We all know getting rid of net neutrality is the catalyst for the apocalypse.... But what shit did they spin they said would be worth it? What is the argument they made? (even if it's wrong). Is there any valid good thing to come out of this? (even if it is far outweighed by the bad)
-
We all know getting rid of net neutrality is the catalyst for the apocalypse.... But what shit did they spin they said would be worth it? What is the argument they made? (even if it's wrong). Is there any valid good thing to come out of this? (even if it is far outweighed by the bad)
I think it was something like "the market will be more free with less regulations".
-
We all know getting rid of net neutrality is the catalyst for the apocalypse.... But what shit did they spin they said would be worth it? What is the argument they made? (even if it's wrong). Is there any valid good thing to come out of this? (even if it is far outweighed by the bad)
I think it was something like "the market will be more free with less regulations".
Something like that. Trump's narrative is that we're drowning in regulations and its killing business.
-
So, net neutrality stops ISP's from throttling specific websites for it's customers, which is only a bad thing for customers. Repealing it will allows ISP's to do it. But of course, no ISP would ever do that, it would be "bad for business". So repealing net neutrality, at best, changes absolutely nothing. At worst, it screws over all the US internet users.
-
We had the internet for like 20 years before Obama made this net neutrality law. I don't recall any ISP shenanigans?
-
We had the internet for like 20 years before Obama made this net neutrality law. I don't recall any ISP shenanigans?
No you probably wouldn't as you live in Australia and Obama was the president of the United States.
-
At different points in time American ISPs have blocked Skype, Vonage and other VOIP systems, electronic wallet transactions (I think such as Googlewallet), and the most famous being Netflix. These all took place from mid 2000s to right before the net neutrality regs were put in place.
The argument against neutrality is that it is stifling ISP innovation and leading to reduced network investment. This is made dispite at least one ISP publicly admitting that net neutrality hasn't affected their network investment.
-
Didn't AOL somehow fail to deliver emails that were critical of AOL... or something? It's hard to remember things. I think I recall some story about Comcast or Verizon blocking gmail in Boston, but I don't know why. There are lots of shitty little things these companies can do because in many places you don't have a choice. You can't just pick a different isp.
https://consumerist.com/2006/04/14/aol-blocks-dearaol-emails/
-
Can you get AOL on the internet?
-
Can you get AOL on the internet?
I was on AOL back in the dial-up days when they introduced their BYOA (Bring Your Own Access) option. Basically, I was able to use a dial-up internet provider to get to AOL.
-
Do you miss that modem connection symphony too? :)
-
Do you miss that modem connection symphony too? :)
Eeeeeeeeee
EEEEEEEEEE
BING
BONG
RUUUUUHHHH
REEEEEEE
-
Those were the good old days.....
-
And 5 minutes for boobs to appear.
-
... I mean that scientific paper on quark spin. ;)
-
... I mean that scientific paper on quark spin. ;)
Me too. Oh wait. Now that I think of it I can't remember what I used the internet for in those days. I think maybe starcraft.
-
Remember when the TV remote was dad telling you to switch the TV to the other channel?
Just think what innovation a TV neutrality law would have spawned.
-
Do you miss that modem connection symphony too? :)
Eeeeeeeeee
EEEEEEEEEE
BING
BONG
RUUUUUHHHH
REEEEEEE
Then wait....wait....waaaaiiittt...
No connection, starting over.
Anybody remember waiting for a song to load at 56k?
-
Do you miss that modem connection symphony too? :)
Eeeeeeeeee
EEEEEEEEEE
BING
BONG
RUUUUUHHHH
REEEEEEE
Then wait....wait....waaaaiiittt...
No connection, starting over.
Anybody remember waiting for a song to load at 56k?
Ever buy mail order, wait 6 to 8 weeks for delivery and pay C.O.D.?
Damn kids ;)
-
Ever buy mail order, wait 6 to 8 weeks for delivery and pay C.O.D.?
Damn kids ;)
Bet you use to walk 5 miles a day, up hill, in the snow to go to school.
-
Do you miss that modem connection symphony too? :)
Eeeeeeeeee
EEEEEEEEEE
BING
BONG
RUUUUUHHHH
REEEEEEE
Then wait....wait....waaaaiiittt...
No connection, starting over.
Anybody remember waiting for a song to load at 56k?
Ever buy mail order, wait 6 to 8 weeks for delivery and pay C.O.D.?
Damn kids ;)
I remember paying $500 to mail order a 40 MB hard drive, only to have the company go out of business and never get the damned thing. >:(
-
Ever buy mail order, wait 6 to 8 weeks for delivery and pay C.O.D.?
Damn kids ;)
Bet you use to walk 5 miles a day, up hill, in the snow to go to school.
Up hill BOTH WAYS !
-
I remember paying $500 to mail order a 40 MB hard drive, only to have the company go out of business and never get the damned thing. >:(
Ouch
-
Do you miss that modem connection symphony too? :)
Eeeeeeeeee
EEEEEEEEEE
BING
BONG
RUUUUUHHHH
REEEEEEE
Then wait....wait....waaaaiiittt...
No connection, starting over.
Anybody remember waiting for a song to load at 56k?
Ever buy mail order, wait 6 to 8 weeks for delivery and pay C.O.D.?
Damn kids ;)
I remember paying $500 to mail order a 40 MB hard drive, only to have the company go out of business and never get the damned thing. >:(
Dude, it was only 40MB. Let it go
Here is another one. Instead of a shitty 40MB, you get 12,000,000MB and its cheaper too. If I were you, I'd be pissed at the bastards selling it to you for that much
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Seagate-ST12000NM0007-12tb-Sata-7200-Rpm-256mb-3-5in-3-5/332405483840?epid=2225097080&hash=item4d64e92940:g:kKAAAOSwRBtZ3STv
-
::) It was probably 35 years ago.
My first computer was a 386 @ 120 MHZ and . . . . . a 40 Meg HD.
ONLY $1600.00
-
Dude, it was only 40MB. Let it go
Here is another one. Instead of a shitty 40MB, you get 12,000,000MB and its cheaper too. If I were you, I'd be pissed at the bastards selling it to you for that much
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Seagate-ST12000NM0007-12tb-Sata-7200-Rpm-256mb-3-5in-3-5/332405483840?epid=2225097080&hash=item4d64e92940:g:kKAAAOSwRBtZ3STv
I think I remember paying about 2100 dollars for my Packard Bell 486 that I saved up a year for..think it had 16 Mb of ram, a 150 mb hard drive, 1mb video card, 66hrz and a 28.8 modem.
I could not see how tech could be better. Though 500 for 40mb is a bit steep, unless this was in the mid 80s.
Anyone remember when a small flat screen was a couple Grand..now you can get them for 199 at Walmart.
Pricing is only proportionate to the stupidity of the buyer.
-
Technology didn't grow in the little bite sizes they fed us either. Every year the newer model ran just a little faster, had just little more storage, and a tweaked operating system with a few more sparkles so every one would rush out and buy it.
-
Back in the day I remember something by the name of 'Commodore VIC20'
And the 286
Watching the kb of ram tick over on the startup hehe. Was quite something to see it get to 4MB!
I quite liked the green mono coloured screens too lol
-
Pricing is only proportionate to the stupidity of the buyer.
The first laser diode I bought cost $18.
Not a laser printer or a laser pointer. Just the fuckin' raw diode.
-
Technology didn't grow in the little bite sized they fed us either. Every year the newer model ran just a little faster, had just little more storage, and a tweaked operating system with a few more sparkles so every one would rush out and buy it.
Add just enough to keep the buyer wanting more but keep from pissing them off.
-
Moore's law is something like: Performance doubles every 2 years and price drops by half.
-
Do you miss that modem connection symphony too? :)
Eeeeeeeeee
EEEEEEEEEE
BING
BONG
RUUUUUHHHH
REEEEEEE
And my personal favorite:
CHAAAAAAA TRLRLLL
-
Catchy tune but hard to dance to . . . I'd give it a 4
-
Moore's law is something like: Performance doubles every 2 years and price drops by half.
Contrary to popular belief, Moore's law says nothing about performance or price. It has more to do with the number of transistors on a die doubling every 2 years.
-
Moore's law is something like: Performance doubles every 2 years and price drops by half.
Contrary to popular belief, Moore's law says nothing about performance or price. It has more to do with the number of transistors on a die doubling every 2 years.
And I don't know why they called it a law. It was a prediction. It held true for several decades then started tapering off, as predicted.
-
Catchy tune but hard to dance to . . . I'd give it a 4
The second and especially the final section of Paranoid Android sounds like a crazy modem and that song was a hit, so...
-
Moore's law is something like: Performance doubles every 2 years and price drops by half.
Contrary to popular belief, Moore's law says nothing about performance or price. It has more to do with the number of transistors on a die doubling every 2 years.
And I don't know why they called it a law. It was a prediction. It held true for several decades then started tapering off, as predicted.
Probably for the same reason they call it "Murphey's Law".
-
Moore's law is something like: Performance doubles every 2 years and price drops by half.
Contrary to popular belief, Moore's law says nothing about performance or price. It has more to do with the number of transistors on a die doubling every 2 years.
And I don't know why they called it a law. It was a prediction. It held true for several decades then started tapering off, as predicted.
Probably for the same reason they call it "Murphey's Law".
Murphy's Law is timeless.
-
Moore's law is something like: Performance doubles every 2 years and price drops by half.
Contrary to popular belief, Moore's law says nothing about performance or price. It has more to do with the number of transistors on a die doubling every 2 years.
Oh, what? I can't make shit up? :)
-
Moore's law is something like: Performance doubles every 2 years and price drops by half.
Contrary to popular belief, Moore's law says nothing about performance or price. It has more to do with the number of transistors on a die doubling every 2 years.
Oh, what? I can't make shit up? :)
There's a difference between making shit up and just regurgitating a common misconception.
-
But is it a misconception? It might not be part of the 'law' but in reality, things do get a shitload cheaper while getting more powerful at the same time.
-
Irrelevant and not necessarily true. Right now researchers are able to create transistors using individual atoms, but I'm guessing that's still quite a lot more expensive than the current processes being used.
-
But is it a misconception? It might not be part of the 'law' but in reality, things do get a shitload cheaper while getting more powerful at the same time.
Moore's Corollary: Stuff gets cheaper and better.
Happy?
-
Shiftard will never be happy. That's not his purpose.
-
But is it a misconception? It might not be part of the 'law' but in reality, things do get a shitload cheaper while getting more powerful at the same time.
Moore's Corollary: Stuff gets cheaper and better.
Happy?
I wasn't unhappy to start with but hey, it still works
-
Look at him go. Wheeeee!!!
So adorbs.
-
the power it gives to the few already very powerful businesses that control web content is borderline dystopian. Rarely has a business historically ever had so much power as, say, Google, this is pushing things too far.
Careful revealing your power level.
Very good post.
I would support a free market system in an actual free market. Unfortunately we live in a world of government funded oppressive monopolies.
-
Reddit, the post.
I do agree with most of it.
Here is a dox of the FCC members involved. Tell them how you feel.
https://pastebin.com/5SApX9LE
Edit. Damnit pastebin, give me five I think I saved it as a .txt file I don't trust skynet google.
-
WTF? You get an award for this?
The Republicans who lead the country’s top telecom agency arrived at an annual gathering of influential conservatives Friday hoping to tout their business bona fides — from freeing the Internet from government’s grasp to battling back the efforts of their Democratic predecessors.
Instead, the appearance by Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai and his GOP colleagues at the agency offered an unexpected brush with a national battle over gun control — and a new ethics complaint targeting one of its members for his comments about President Trump.
It began as soon as Pai arrived on stage at the Conservative Political Action Conference at National Harbor in Maryland, where he was slated to deliver a short speech.
But Dan Schneider, executive director of the CPAC-producing American Conservative Union, said there had been a change of plans. As Pai chuckled, Schneider ceded the podium to Carolyn Meadows, the second vice president of the National Rifle Association. And Meadows presented Pai with the “Charlton Heston Courage Under Fire Award,” an honor that the NRA occasionally bestows on those who champion conservative causes despite intense criticism. Previous awardees include Vice President Pence and conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh.
In this case, the award was a “Kentucky handmade long gun,” said Meadows, who admitted the rifle could not be brought on stage. She said it would be stored for Pai at an NRA museum.
Conservative leaders explained they were honoring Pai partly because of his work to roll back federal rules that had subjected Internet providers to tougher regulations. The fight over net neutrality has resulted in Pai receiving death threats, forcing him to cancel recent public speeches.
The award came in the same week that the NRA’s leader appeared on stage at CPAC and blasted emerging federal efforts to restrict gun sales in the wake of the deadly school shooting in Parkland, Fla.
Pai appeared stunned. (His spokesman said that the FCC chairman had no idea he would receive such an award.) He soon joined a panel to discuss telecom policy along with his fellow Republican commissioners, including Michael O’Rielly, who quipped: “Not every day you get a musket.”
-
The most amazing part of that whole show, they didn't hand him the rifle on stage. Because cpac does not permit firearms.
The people that want to arm every elementary school teacher with an ar15 won't even allow guns at their event.
-
If they allowed guns Mona Charen probably wouldn't have made it out of there alive.
-
Part of me kind of wants to go to the next cpac just because it seems like some kind of horror movie.
-
Part of me kind of wants to go to the next cpac just because it seems like some kind of horror movie.
I still can't believe that the right wing thinks net neutrality is a bad thing. What am I missing?
Do they think it will only censor left wing liberal content? I suspect they haven't thought it through.
-
Part of me kind of wants to go to the next cpac just because it seems like some kind of horror movie.
I still can't believe that the right wing thinks net neutrality is a bad thing. What am I missing?
Do they think it will only censor left wing liberal content? I suspect they haven't thought it through.
Most people don't have a complete understanding on what net neutrality is. All they know is that it pisses off the liberals so therefore he deserves a medal.
I'm starting to think we've made a terrible mistake by not just letting the South secede.
-
Wow, he saved the internet? WTF?
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/02/nra-gives-ajit-pai-courage-award-and-gun-for-saving-the-internet/
I can see a crowd funded project to fund ISP's to throttle and block NRA websites and media, as being one way to bring home the message.
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DW_ZHlDVwAAIvl5.jpg)
I PLEDGE TO WORK FOR FREE for any school to help secure the children. I am a 29 year retired veteran, Infantry Sergeant Major, U.S. Army Ranger with combat experience. I have a conceal carry, Primary and Alternate side arms, an AR-15, and all necessary tactical gear.
-
Here's the video that
clip still was from. It's not photoshopped.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=7&v=LFhT6H6pRWg
Words fail me.
Edit: I wonder why timestamped youtube videos don't embed?
-
Part of me kind of wants to go to the next cpac just because it seems like some kind of horror movie.
I still can't believe that the right wing thinks net neutrality is a bad thing. What am I missing?
Do they think it will only censor left wing liberal content? I suspect they haven't thought it through.
I petitioned against it, you often accuse me of being far right. Not everyone fits so easily into a box.
Fyi i was the herdcore libertarians, "muh free market capitalism." That supported the net neutrality bill.
Our goverments are just chess pieces to large multi national corporations. Trusting those corporations directly to do what's best for the people is just naive.
-
Fyi i was the herdcore libertarians, "muh free market capitalism." That supported the net neutrality bill.
So a "herdcore libertarian" is now running the FCC?
That's funny on so many levels. I suspect that Ajit Pai is so dumb he thinks it was a win for libertarians.
-
You know I saw the typo but then left it for the unintentional pun.
-
You know I saw the typo but then left it for the unintentional pun.
I thought it was perfect. The birth of a new meme. "herdcore"
-
You know I saw the typo but then left it for the unintentional pun.
I thought it was perfect. The birth of a new meme. "herdcore"
Not as new as you might think.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Herdcore
-
This might actually pass. It'll be interesting to see if Trump vetoes it.