He points out, correctly, that many servers don't need much. Particularly with cloud services, servers might spin up a whole bunch of very lightweight virtual machines doing one thing (running a web server like nginx for example).

So his big idea is a "server-only" distribution that doesn't have any support at all for GUI operation. But he doesn't really explain the benefit. As far as I can understand, he names one single benefit: such a distro would be "not beholden to architectural changes made due to desktop package requirements."

The only "architectural changes" I can think of recently are related to systemd, so I guess this was his very roundabout way of wishing for a Linux distribution with no systemd support.

Am I wrong here? Did you manage to find any other advantage listed in his article to explain why it would be great if you were unable to set up a machine running your server OS with a GUI?

Lets see what he does in 2032.

Right. Everybody I know cares about saving the planet from global warming until I ask them if they've started taking cold showers. Nobody needs a hot shower - they're actually quite unnatural and bad for your skin too. Yet, I've not once gotten an affirmative answer (stick a RADAR gun on how fast they can change the subject!)

We need to stop ascribing any virtue whatsoever to hypocrites who only want other people to sacrifice (and actually call them out on their ill behavior - it's harmful in aggregate).

We largely agree that it sucks to be stuck drooling in a nursing home. But the reason people are keeping strict diets, exercising, and doing math puzzles is almost certainly not to live longer, but to live better during the time that they have. I want to die the moment living isn't fun anymore, but I want to delay that moment as long as possible. That's why I spend time and effort on keeping healthy: not because I simply want to live forever, but I want to feel like I'm able to have a really good time forever.

The counterpoint to this is that comcast had exceptional problems providing netflix which cleared up literally instantly when netflix signed a payment agreement.

I.e. comcast already had the required capacity and was disabling it for netflix traffic.

The rental idea has been tried but doesn't work.

I forget the exact reason but essentially they find a way to put in extra costs which they can refund to themselves. Another way... they set a high cost for line upkeep and they perform the line upkeep so the essence for them is taking money out of the left pocket and putting it back in the right pocket while the cost is unprofitably high for everyone else.

You basically need an iron wall between bandwidth and content providers. Separate companies with separate employees and entirely separate management.

Aye,
Other issues like abortion, taxation levels, foreign affairs are much more significant to voting than net neutrality.

dang it... they were 27.. .and he's 57.

I hate slashdot editing restrictions.

Except they were 37 and he's 57.

Most people are dead by 82 anyway (about 87%).

And almost everyone is dead by 90 (98.4%).

The last few years can be miserable and suicide is more common among the elderly.

While some desperately cling to life the loss of function, increasing pain, and loss of dignity takes the joy out of life for many.

There are two cases..

My grandmother, who was religious, who was basically unable to move and had to be wheeled out to the sun area of the nursing home every day, who suffered fear and pain for her last 8 years wanted to live until the end.

My mother, who was religious, basically decided to go at 72 after 2 years of being in and out of the hospital.

The loneliness can be pretty crushing too. It's one reason people don't retire.

Everyone on the planet (or in orbit, for that matter) has those rights. It's just that some people live in jurisdictions whose government fails to recognize them.

"Superstorm"* Sandy

* So named because it wasn't even strong enough to count as a real hurricane...

On the contrary, Sandy was a category 2 hurricane when it made landfall on Cuba. Moreover, it still had hurricane-force winds when it made landfall in New Jersey; the only reason it wasn't called a "hurricane" was that it was post-tropical. In other words, it was as severe as a hurricane, but a different kind of storm.

It would be the government is now regulating the actual traffic on the internet

You are a liar, doing nothing but spreading FUD.

Regulating ISPs as Common Carriers would "regulate the actual traffic on the Internet" exactly as much as regulating phone companies as Common Carriers censors the content of telephone calls -- which is to say, not in the slightest.

Yeah, and if you ask most people who have an opinion on net-neutrality, "should an ISP with settlement-free peering arrangements be able to give preferential QoS service to their paying customers on congested interfaces?" most of them will have their eyes glaze over and start rambling about censorship or something.

You don't conduct a man-on-the-street interview to understand the energy of the Higg's Field, you build an LHC. Engineering and economics can work around opinion polls and popularity contests, but they sure aren't goverend by them, no matter what anybody wishes were true.