I was just talking about this with my friend yesterday. She said that someone on the bus just looks over at a woman on her cell phone, and that another rider gave her the dirtiest look until he spoke up and said, 'please put away your cell phone' My friend thought the guy was rude, but I thought he was justified. Cell phones seriously irritate me. That's one good thing about riding the subway.

The fact that this has not yet reached 5, Funny means that a few moderators missed the pun.

It's the same with Apple's rejection of Theora... It's not about providing the best experience for users.

Or Mozilla's rejection of H.264, it's not providing the best experience for users.

I'm pretty sure they got the patent from Xerox, for rooms. The idea was that you use a room and house analogy for your window manager. So all offices applications are in the office room, games in the gaming room, recipes belong in the kitchen, etc. And you had to switch rooms via a door icon, no joke.

It's clear from the context that he meant a lobbyist influenced someone in the administration to block the appointment. Stop being pedantic.

It's a very fast moving tree. For example, I'm running 2.6.32 on F12 right now even though it shipped with .31. The .32 kernel just happens to be the release that balances the need for test enough with the latest release out of kernel.org.

I don't know, ibiblio is kind of legit. Red Hat didn't feel like releasing a torrent, since they don't have a tracker lying around.

Exactly! I'm reminded of this post by email researcher Meng Weng Wong, where he talks about DSL and providing good email service:

DSL providers should just say to their customers, we'll just drop your price by $X a month if you decline POP --- that way we save on machines, sysadmins, and software licensing fees, and we get to say we're 20% cheaper than the competition ... and you'll just go off and use Hotmail, which is what you were going to do anyway!

Maybe they'd use gmail instead of hotmail today, but the same principal applies.

The parent article also mentions that ruling. But aside from that, what makes you think that the FCC is going to lobby for broadband deregulation in the future? If anything, they're going to fight for broadband regulation now that they've realized they've created a monster. I expect in the future broadband will be more heavily regulated, and Comcast will file this incident under, "Lessons on biting the hand that feeds."

Good thing Comcast doesn't operate across state lines!

But seriously, broadband access is already "lightly regulated" by the FCC. All they need to do is go to congress and get that changed to "heavily regulated" and then they can continue with their net-neutrality laws, despite what the Constitution says.

Indeed, it is the case that "they don't have common carrier status." This is explicitly mentioned in the article:

The cable company had also argued that the FCC lacks authority to mandate Net neutrality because it deregulated broadband. The FCC now defines broadband as a lightly regulated information service. That means it is not subject to the obligations traditional telecommunications services have to share their networks with competitors and treat all traffic equally.

The best part is that the decision may cause "the agency [to] simply reclassify broadband as a more heavily regulated telecommuniciations service." In that respect, Comcast has dug its own grave, as well as those of several others, Time Warner, Cablevision, Verizon to name a few.

Thanks for setting the record straight. I can't tell you how many times Citizens United has come up in conversation where people went in with the wrong assumptions. In fact, just recently, a federal court blocked the Republican National Committee from taking unlimited money from corporations, which is exactly what most people think is perfectly legal in the wake of the Citizens United decision.