followed tags: 25
followed domains: 0
badges given: 0 of 1
member for: 281 days
I want to say that banning things like books and words is idiotic, since there are bunches of really smart people out there who will be goaded into action by any such restriction. I also see how easily developed nations can devolve into authoritarianism and have to reconsider my statement.
One time I stress-ate an entire Little Caesar's Hot-n-Ready pizza during a football game. The only reason I didn't have more was because I had only bought one. Fortunately my body didn't balloon outward but I felt disgusted with myself for the next week.
So yeah. Pizza.
Not smart btw. Just a pissed-off layperson.
1) The repeal will likely go to court, where it may eventually be overturned. However, this takes time and during the court battle Comcast, Verizon et al will be able to run wild.
2) Don't know much about this one. Sounds like if you can't get to sites for trading cryptocurrency (if that's how it works) it will be hard to justify spending money on it.
3) No clue but it gives me a bad feeling. These telecoms have proven ill intent many times before. Stifling innovation, gagging certain viewpoints and cutting off specific users' access to specific sites would be scary. Who knows if they'll actually go there but I don't put anything past Comcast.
4) It isn't the end, but it may be the beginning of the end. Losing the internet as a tool to collaborate and pool knowledge would be a huge blow to many scientific efforts. Additionally, this may provide extra incentive for companies to leave the US, since outside of America there are still several countries who have codified net neutrality into law. It just sucks, basically, and there's only so much we can do to stop it now.
Unless we all became single-issue voters regarding NN.
From what I understand, you're mostly right. Although I don't know enough about Internet infrastructure to speak definitively on the topic, I believe it's hugely expensive to run fiber cable for any meaningful distance. Any new competitor would have to run their own cable lines, and this creates a pretty high barrier to entry. It'd be like running another power source or water pipe network to your house, which is why the concept of Internet as a utility makes sense.
Another problem is that corporations either sue or lobby cities and states to prevent them from setting up municipal networks, in order to maintain their control of distribution. One major exception is Chattanooga, which built an excellent network and is now one of the fastest-growing cities in America. In many cases, cities can't do that due to lawsuits or regulations proposed by telecoms.
So here we are, with crony capitalist regulations on one hand and other regulations to help offset their impact on another. Only now the offsetting regulations are gone.
Awesome! I didn't think this would be the outcome, even after Moore was revealed to be a monster as well as a scumbag. There was even a pretty decent turnout, from what I heard. Guess this was a bridge too far even for Alabama.
So how does everyone think we should best prepare our grandchildren for the world of Mad Max? I'm assuming that we're all gonna be selfish and have multiple grandchildren.
- In a 2007 email, with the subject “Possible Opportunity in DEA—READ AND DELETE,” Prado sought to pitch the network to the Drug Enforcement Administration, bragging that Blackwater had developed “a rapidly growing, worldwide network of folks that can do everything from surveillance to ground truth to disruption operations.” He added, “These are all foreign nationals (except for a few cases where US persons are the conduit but no longer ‘play’ on the street), so deniability is built in and should be a big plus.”
And the Amyntor Group named in the article is based out of Whitefish, Montana. The same small town that is home to Whitefish Energy, who was the one awarded the fishy contract for rebuilding Puerto Rico's power grid. What the hell is going on in that town? Why does this feel like a Tom Clancy novel?
- After weeks of continuously unfolding abuse scandals, men have become, quite literally, unbelievable. What any given man might say about gender politics and how he treats women are separate and unrelated phenomena.
- By STEPHEN MARCHE
Forgive me for assuming the author's gender, but doesn't he invalidate his own article in the first paragraph? I didn't bother reading beyond that absurd statement so I don't know if he exempts himself later.