But this is specifically about streamed games. Locally rendered games (as with WebGL) can render the scene immediately in response to the player's input, so they don't have this problem. The lag is still there, but you only have to deal with the physics side of it, rather than dealing with the physics *and* the audio and video.

The scenario you describe doesn't make any sense because the idea is that you choose the frame (or scene) based on the inputs on the local machine. So if you're rendering it anyway then you may as well just have the local client respond itself to the inputs and do away with the overhead.

While this is a legitimate concern it's not a problem with Net neutrality, but with advertising standards and defective performance.

TV and Music is a non-responsive, non-interactive recording.

From a physics perspective the age and material of the lines are irrelevant. Signals travel at nearly the same speed. The latency is due to the physical limitations of the hardware and routing infrastructure. This is mitigated by placing the server closer to the client, which obviously costs the game provider much more.

Actually, loading screens would be one thing that cloud computing might make economical to seriously reduce.

Yeah. And yes, language is meant to be used creatively.

Regular online games don't have this problem as frames are rendered locally. Only streamed games will benefit benefit, and that's what the question was referring to. His question isn't addressed in the article, so your call to read it is completely irrelevant.

>Do you think everyone needs the same speed?

That was emphatically negated in the previous comment.

Net neutrality isn't about preventing different tiers of service either. It's about preventing businesses from colluding to distort the market with bribes and kickbacks by slowing and blocking competing business.
When the primary arguments from the anti-neutrality camp are based on disinformation you know the case is pretty clear-cut.

You've being overly vague and ambiguous in your first paragraph. It might indeed be the case that few people understand the intricacies of police situations, they're not professionals after all. But that doesn't mean they're thankless. And scrutinizing their procedures doesn't equate to being disrespectful.

  As I said before, we shouldn't just be looking into the final dilemma that resulted in this tragic end. We should be asking how it got this far in the first place and whether best practices were adhered to.

What does thankless even mean? Any person who has had a situation resolved by the police will be very greatful, and the profession is well regarded in society.but this doesn't place them above criticism and scrutiny when something bad like this happens. We need to know if all the necessary precautions and reasonable alternatives were considered, that the best practice was executed. A simple "he pulled his gun first" isn't adequate.

Voice calls are very cheap and reasonable in many developing countries such that it isn't really an issue. In my experience the connection quality is usually too low for an adequate VOIP service, but this may change with the new generation of mobile internet.

My perception is that telcos in developed markets are finding it more lucrative to milk whatever they can from legacy customers still ready to pay high prices for voice service than invest and develop new technologies and services.

Because part of that growth is likely to directly benefit your field of work and thus net you more income.

I think its more about harm minimization and giving people a basic sense of dignity. While there may be opponents, the current consensus seems to be that the visas are beneficial. In that case the people should be welcomed and not have to live with severe restrictions on their lifestyle. I think that's a more worthy cause than the more lofty concept of protecting jobs from being "taken". If we can't do that, then we should probably just give out fewer visas.

Because coding is an incredibly useful skill when you realize how much of the "real world" wastes time on mundane tasks which could be improved or automated. Especially if you're in a non-engineering background even the simplest of coding skills can put you far ahead of your peers.

Formatting is a pretty easy concept for beginners. No more problematic than other formalisms for closing loops, which will equally cause problems.

If email and cut&paste is messing up your indentation then you need to solve that problem first and foremost, not just rely on the fact that the language doesn't care.

You're confusing two different problems, namely locating a point source on a dark background, and wide-field imaging. The former can be improved beyond the diffraction limit, while the latter can't.