ISP should be limited to purchasing more bandwidth and using anti-bufferbloat AQMs, but no throttling or QoS.

QoS may be hard. But it's necessary, because streaming and TCP don't play well together.

Streaming requires low latency, low jitter, low packet loss, and has a moderate and limited (in absence of compression, typically constant) bandwidth. TCP, when being used for things like large file transfers, increases speed to consume ALL available bandwidth at the tightest choke point, and divide it fairly among all TCP connections using the choke point. It discovers the size of the choke point by expanding until packets are dropped, and signals other TCP connections by making their packets drop. The result that TCP forces poor QoS onto streams unless the infrastructure is massively oversized.

This can be fixed by a number of traffic management schemes. But they all have this in common:
  - They treat different packets differently.
  - The infrastructure can be misused for competitive advantage and other unfair business practices.

The PROBLEM is not the differing treatment of different packages (which can help consumers), but the misuse of the capability (to hurt consumers).

So IMHO an "appropriate legal remedy", under current legal theories, is not to try to force ISPs to treat all packets the same (and break QoS), but to limit the ISPs ability and incentives to misuse the capability.

So the appropriate regulation is not communications technical regulation, but consumer protection and antitrust law:
  - Consumer fraud law should already cover misbehavior that penalizes certain traffic flows improperly. (What is "internet service" if it doesn't handle whatever end-to-end traffic is thrown at it, just for starters) Ditto charging extra for better packet treatment rather than just fatter pipes, charging anyone other than their base customers for the service, or heavily penalizing packets of customers (or the customers themselves) whose usage is problematic for the ISP but within the advertised service. If current law needs a tweak, the enforcement infrastructure is already there should Congress choose to commit the tweak and use it.
  - Penalizing packets of competitors for its own services, or giving appropriate handling to its own packets of a type and not to that of others, is anticompetitive behavior. Indeed, having such services in the same company AT ALL, let alone forming conglomerates that include both "content" creation and Internet service distributing it, is a glaring conflict-of-interest, of the sort that led to the historic breakups of AT&T and Standard Oil. Antitrust law is up to the problem: Just use it.

(I put quotes around "appropriate legal remedy" above, because I think that a free market solution would be even better. Unfortunately, we don't have a free market in ISP services, due to massive, government-created or government-ignored barriers to entry. And we aren't likely to see one in the near future - or EVER, unless the government power-wielders get it through their skulls that "competition" and its free-market betnefits don't kick in until there are at least three, and usually until there are four or more, competitors for each customer. (This "Two-is-competition, Hey! Where's the market benefits?" error has been built into communication law ever since the allocation of bandwidth for the early, analog, AMPS cellphone service.) With only two "competitors", market forces drive them to cartel-like behavior and all-the-market-will-bear pricing, without any collusion at all.)

Thanks, you've just demonstrated my point, pretty much exactly. Can we get some chants for Articles II and III? I'm sure that will be far less popular, but highly relevant.

You can chant "4th Amendment" till you're blue in the face, as is common here, but if the issue at hand isn't covered by the 4th Amendment then the 4th Amendment is irrelevant. Even if the 4th Amendment does apply, its application may not be what you expected.

The 4th Amendment to the US Constitution is simply law, not a magic talisman able to repel all things people here find unpleasant.

If it wasn't for that pesky Constitution and the actual body of law from it.

I think if you examine the US Constitution for the acceptable means to alter its contents that street protests and tirades on Slashdot are not among them. The law is what it is until properly changed.

You can't pardon and release those that aren't imprisoned. How and why were they imprisoned, and by whom? The government is responsible for more than one thing, and is granted the power to do it. Ignoring that fact does not make it go away.

I guess you aren't a big believer in the US Constitution then. There seem to be things like the army, navy, militia, and common defense mentioned. I also see that the President is given the power to grant Pardons. Might some people be in jail for breach of peace, reducing the "safety" of others? You might think so.

Preamble to the United States Constitution

Clause 1: Command of military; Opinions of cabinet secretaries; Pardons

Your oversight is understandable. People here are all about Amendments 1, 2, 4, and 5. They don't really care much about any other part of the Constitution, and that inattention shows.

As you have just demonstrated again. It is only "extremely rare" (for some values of "extremely) in the West, at present, and not necessarily in other parts of the world. This is subject to change.

Probably either after his first National Intelligence briefing, or after the first massacre.

.... keeping in mind that what liberty requires in regard to restrictions may be different than what the mob believes.

The issue here isn't the ability to read, but applying the law, which in this case is the Constitution.

Previous court cases have settled the question regarding the treatment of phone records: they are ordinary business records.

Here is what they are not: your person, your papers, your effects. They aren't kept in your home.

If you don't like the law, work to get it changed. Mod bombing me will have no effect on the law.

Since we're quoting the US Constitution, there is another part of it that applies to these questions that for some reason nobody wants to pay attention to:

Clause 1: Command of military; Opinions of cabinet secretaries; Pardons
 

As noted above the previous section from Wikipedia:

"...after music streaming service Grooveshark was shutdown"
Why in hell are you using a noun when a verb is required?

This is how language evolves.

Sometimes you can convince people to drop a useful construct or misspelling - like by telling them it makes their arguments less convincing. Other times it's like trying to sweep back the tied.

Are you going to host it in Antigua?

Come on. This misinformation is 30 years old already. Why can't we let it die already?

Contrary to popular belief, Haimes never claimed that a CAT scan had caused her to lose her psychic powers. In fact, the often alluded-to CAT scan never took place. Haimes only claimed that the headaches resulting from her allergic reaction prevented her from earning a living as a psychic.

On the other hand, I could see an MRI actually destroying a hypothetical human magnetic navigation sense.

  - A number of animals, including birds, are documented to have a magnetic sense they use in navigation.
  - Bacteria are known to migrate vertically using the earth's field to align them as "dipping needles" so their cilia drive them downward to lower-oxygen water.
  - The bacteria obtain their magnetic alignment by depositing crystals of magnetitie of a size that will hold no more than a single magnetic domain, and thus be automatically magetized. New crystals are deposited next to old, making them align in the same direction. The row of crystals is a strong enough magnet to align the bug like a compass needle. The row is normally split when the bug reproduces, so the two new bugs are both magnetized the same way, rather than one getting a 50/50 chance of swimming the wrong way. (No doubt the occasional offspring gets none and has to take the chance - which let the species survive magnetic reversal events.)
  -Some nerve cells in a number of animals contain such magnetite particles, leading to the speculation that these may be the basis for a magnetic sense.
  - Among such nerve types is on in the human nose, leading to the speculation that some humans may be able to "smell" magnetic fields (or have some magnetic sense in some OTHER group of neurons that ALSO produces the particles and that those in the nose are vestigial mis-triggering of the mechanism, or that an organism in their ancestry may once have had a magnetic sense, of which this is a vestigial remanent.)
  - (I have a small number of personal, anaecdotal, experiences that lead me to believe that I once had a magnetic sense that was input to my brain's location processing, but at a priority far below visual observation. These all occurred before I ever had an MRI.)
  - If some nerves do detect ambient magnetism by monitoring mechanical forces originating in magnetitie particles, the strong magnetic field of an MRI machine might be expected to disrupt this by modifying the magnetization of the particles, or by yanking on then so strongly they disrupt, or even kill, the nerves in question.

So if humans DO have a magnetic sense of this form, it might actually be destroyed by exposure to, and especially testing in, an MRI machine.

TFA said: "Otherwise, it risks having users (slowly but surely) switch to more secure platforms that do give them updates in a timely manner."

I'm curious what platforms those might be.

The only one I'm (slightly) familiar with at the moment is Replicant, which is an all-open port of Android - with support for a limitied - and (thus?) somewhat pricey (when even available)- handful of platforms.

("All-Open" being defined as "Functionality dependent on binary blobs we don't have open source replacements for is left out of the distribution. You might get it working by installing proprietary modules. But we think that's a bad idea / counterproductive / reduces incentive for people to MAKE open source replacements, so we don't recommend it or provide instructions." i.e. do a web search for somebody who figured out how to do it if you want, say, the front camera, WiFI, or Bluetooth to work and forget about GPS for now. (v4.2 on Samsung s3))

Now I think that's the right approach. And I'd love to see more support or help for the project.

But are there others? If so, what are they?

Decades to regain capabilities you say? You mean like the current US capability for manned space flight? Or are you all jazzed up about the first and only country to put astronauts on the moon and return them safely to earth being reduced to having its astronauts hitchhike a ride into space from other countries like Russia (under embargo for aggression, probing the US with nuclear bombers and subs), China (nuclear threats against US), or maybe India?

If you want to beat the gong about "wars on science" you better include Democrats & Progressives. There is no shortage of unscientific nonsense to be found there.

No, the real story, that the US is going to reinvigorate its moribund manned space capability is clearly mentioned. Or don't you think geeks interested in that?