also the way regulation would have effected it then and how it would effect it now are vastly different.

This is very much a worst case scenario. The Alternative future(one where corporations like comcast control what you can see and when u can see it is much worse.

I even pointed out that moore's law results in more speed.
BUT MOORE's law had nothing to do with speed increasing, that is a side effect.
So what u dont seem to get is we know comps have been getting faster and software advancement has caused it to speed up more but this is a moot statement when discussing moore's law....MOORE'S law is about fabrication not performance. So software advancement has no relation to it.

We see what the guy is saying but he is saying it completely wrong.
And for some people(seems i am not the only one) moore's law concept issues is sorta a pet peeve

Wow. lets see if i can explain your error.
Moore's law describes a long-term trend in the history of computing hardware. The number of transistors that can be placed inexpensively on an integrated circuit has doubled approximately every two years
It has nothing at all to do with processor speed or performance(although those are sideeffects) it only concerns itself with number of transistors.
The comment is saying that moore's law is actually misleading or irrelevant, That algorithims speed us up more than more transistors(although that is very misleading).
In order for "Progress In Algorithms Beats Moore's Law" to be true, that means the algorithm actually increased the number of transistors on the circuit(which is preposterous)
so to quote the other guy,
"So how did they magically increase the number of transistors using software? Oh whait, someone didn't know what Moore's law was..."

TL:DR
"Even more remarkable - and even less widely understood - is that in many areas, performance gains due to improvements in algorithms have vastly exceeded even the dramatic performance gains due to increased processor speed." has absolutely nothing to do with Moore's Law because Moore's law doesn't concern itself with performance. And the guy above u was correct in his comment.

bingo, lancet surveys are straight misinformation. U can make a survey say anything u want. /quote Just need to point out you don't offer any proof or citation yourself so how do you know the original figure is incorrect? Gut feeling? /quote

no, he used sense. and place like www.iraqbodycount.org use things like police shootouts and include terrorist casualties yet push they're from page like it is a US deal.

To say WE(American/coalition military) killed 500k people is a sign of someone spitting what they heard on TV back. There has been 500k civilian death since 2003 including= civilians killed by coalition forces, civilians killed by Terrorist factions(car bombs, suicide bombers, random attacks on civilians), people killed by police during shootouts, and just about anything else they can term a violent death.

But wait, Press conferences, official comments, unofficial comments made by official people like the Director of Prosecution Marianne Ny, like when she said she is requesting the court order to question Mr Assange because he is suspected of rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion.

The police doesn't post its news, it does the same shit as every other, they have interviews, conferences, and announcements. i swear the average IQ of /. is rapidly deteriorating.

It is better to not speak and be thought an idiot then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

i love the occasional idiot who thinks he is the only person capable of getting news, theSwedish pushed the idea that it was rape.before american media picked it up i was reading about the "rape" charge. American media just picked up the bullshit flowing out of the local shit.
Its called Character Assassination and all countries love to use it.

quite a leap? hardly so imo. This thought i think is verified in the internet kill switch debate. A button(essentially) to disable any website deemed harmful or infringing, if u think use of that will stop at copyright u are ignorant of politics and american history. Case and point= Wikileaks(i know we are all sick of hearing the name) they keep getting taken down based on a political reasons, not legal ones.

U dont lose rights, they are eroded away.

there is no true anon online anymore...best ways to hide are already here...Tor and a proxy somewhere where laws are lax.

i hardly see this as evil.
the ONLY reason net nuetrality is a issue is due to the lack of choices. If i have the ability to leave and go to another provider then it will enforce itself(i.e. if u start throttling the bandwidth people will leave and go to someone who doesn't.) With landline internet usually there is one company that services the area (by contract with the local government) and several very lesser services that are barely useable. That is why we need the net nuetrality regulation.

Wireless doesn't have the same limitations on choices. If wireless is offered, very rarely is it only offered by one provider. So if your wireless provider is throttling you, leave and go to one who says they wont.

See theoretically i could start my own wireless internet service with enough startup cash. however i cannot start my own cable internet company in my city because comcast has a deal with the local gov. The only time government regulation should come in is when you cant leave who is exploiting you. Thats called free market(well almost free).

it is a problem....i have been and constantly see throttling on my connection... Throttling is where i pay for 3mbs yet for some reasons(not on peak time) i see a sudden drastic drop in my speed(usually down to .5 to 1 mbs) now remember this is offpeak times(i am a night guy) and my neighbor who is a email facebook person doesn't see these drops even during peak hours. If i pay for a bandwidth i should get it no matter where i am visiting....that is what net neutrality is. just because i watch vids on my comp doesnt mean i shouldnt get the bandwidth i PAID FOR!!! .People who are argueing it isnt broke are either: A.In with the Megacorps that are the villain here or B. have no idea about what net neutrality is and need to educate themselves before talking.

umm..no it hasn't worked out....our speeds are some of the lowest in the modern world with some of the highest prices. there are only 2 ways to make access to the internet working....ban this bullshit monopoly companies make with cities....or regulate the shit out of comcast so i don't drop down to .5 mbs when i am paying for 3 just because i use all of the bandwidth i am paying for..

First off u are trying to mislead. We are not handing the internet over to the government. We are asking them to watch over the crooks who run the doorways to the internet. Why do you think Comcast doesn't have a right to regulate traffic on its own networks Well my uniformed friend. The internet requires one of 2 things to happen. 1. Either there is NEt neutrality enforced by FCC.(noone else will) Why do i think Comcast doesnt have the right to bottleneck my bandwidth? Because they are the only internet in my city, They have a special deal with the local gov to prevent any other internet companies from infringing on their territory. This is called a monopoly and has been sanctioned by our governments as ways to develop infrastructure. Now if u are going to prevent me from having choices then u need to regulate the ones who get the monopoly(to put in a easy way, the internet needs the same kind of regulation the power company monopolies have). 2. NO GOVERNMENT SACTIONED MONOPOLIES. The only way a free market(which we sorta have) can function is is joe blow can open he own ISP when comcast throttles him. He then says, "Come to My ISP where i wont throttle u." anyone with have a mind moves and all the nerds tell their friends to move and to remain competitive Comcast has to treat thier customers right. Unforunately comcast has cut out the competition and therefore can treat their customers anyway they want.....my internet is out atleast 2 days a week. Untold downtime during late hours, I hate comcast yet i have nowhere i can go. The only other option is DSL that runs somewhere around 256k. I seriously wonder where net neutrality supporters are getting this notion that the government is neutral at all.The GOP will probably take Congress and prevent a government takeover of the internet--thank goodness. It would be a crushing blow to freedom of speech and the flowing of ideas. The government FUCKS UP EVERYTHING IT DOES. Are u serious what kind of arguement is that? here we go. Right the government is far from neutral. However they are more subject to us than comcast. ontop of that this is really Government against government. The fcc does stupid stuff but the do good to. Take your arguement to other areas...bank reform(well the government fubars everything let the banks care for themselves) With that mentality the government should just sit there and do absolutely nothing.........well then they aren;t a government. Freedom of speech stands to be protected under Net nuetrality. I truely wonder if u even understand the concept. Net nuetrality (in its most basic form) is u pay for a bandwidth(which unless i ordered wrong, my bill is for 3mbs not 3mbs to some websites and .5 to others) regardless of where u are going u should get that bandwidth. The way comcast wants it, its like if i filled my car with gas....now if i drive to store i get 25 mpg but if i go to someone the gasstation has a deal with, i get 35 mpg but they charge me for 35 regardless of where i am going. how is that not a fubared business system? the result to the handsoff idea: A tiered internet(which several isps have already begun talking with companies about) which consists of u have to pay to visit certain sites. For the news and email package: $29.99 If u want face book thats an extra 4 bucks. Now if u want to game well that take more bandwidth and gamers tend to spend more online so that is a $55 package. Now for the freedom of speech. U think if comcast is limiting access to sites like youtube(which is one of the big ones comcast plans on hitting) they wont to joe blows site? If i cant get to his site i cant read his opinion and he has lost his voice on the internet. Stop with the shitty fear mongering, If u think comcast side has done good to protect the freedom of speech please show me ONE time. There is a reason they were voted shittest company.