Comment Re:Enough is enough (Score 1) 384
Me neither.
Me neither.
What banner ads? Between directly supporting
I think you meant:
I want *blood* because the site which I use regularly but don't pay money for doesn't meet my exacting standards
To which I'd say: I actually do pay. I've supported
With that said, I don't think SK is being unprofessional or unreasonable. I think that the concern that dice might hurt what is good about
If you actually meant to say that people who are paying money don't deserve to get what they paid for, then I'm very confused by your post.
Yeah. It's sad really. I wanted to love our dice overlords. I even wanted to give the new interface a chance (while hedging my bets with soylentnews)
So now I need to find a new site. I've looked and so far, I haven't been able to find a great option.
I'm not well versed and it sounds like you are. So is it against the law for me to get a text from a friend who says he'll give me $20 to drive him to his dental appointment? How about if I refer him to someone else I trust? Where does the line get drawn?
I'm not saying that there shouldn't be rules or laws or lines in the sand. I'm just curious what separates legal behavior from illegal behavior since I can't really tell from what I've read so far.
It is explicitly stated in the contract:
Any breach of this Agreement may cause Amazon irreparable harm for which there is no adequate remedy at law. As a result, Amazon will be entitled to the issuance by a court of competent jurisdiction of an injunction, restraining order, or other equitable relief in favor of itself, without the necessity of posting a bond, restraining Employee from committing or continuing to commit any such violation.
You assume I'm outraged. I do understand the need for non-compete, non-disclosure and intellectual property ownership transfer clauses in contracts; in the right place and circumstances. I even understand the difference between enforceable and unenforceable contracts.
I'm not outraged.
I think it is silly and expect it to be unenforceable, and I doubt they have any intent of enforcing it. That doesn't mean it isn't a threat. There is no real contract without some threat of enforcement, and that's the key word: threat.
Whether Amazon takes action or not, it is a threat which discourages specific actions. It doesn't matter whether it is actively enforced or not. That's the real danger, the threat discourages specific actions. That's a threat, even if they choose not to follow through on it.
There is a place for those types of clauses. This is obviously not the place and it is good that people are bothered by it. I may not be particularly bothered, certainly not outraged, but I'm glad that unreasonable contracts get negative attention.
Except Amazon hasn't actually threatened anyone.
Yes. Yes they did. That's exactly what a non-compete contract is: a threat.
People value a stable government. They won't stop paying taxes until they fear their government more than the anarchy that would replace it. They don't fear this enough.
My experience is similar. I have appreciated how easy it is to work with. I point one domain at my home server, a sub-domain of that at Google AppEngine and my other domain at Google Sites.
Your needs will determine who the best host is for you. Here's what works for me:
Thanks, you may be right, but I was certainly wrong, I was actually thinking of the Netflix vs Verizon issue:
Verizon has confirmed that everything between that router in their network and their subscribers is uncongested – in fact has plenty of capacity sitting there waiting to be used. Above, I confirmed exactly the same thing for the Level 3 network. So in fact, we could fix this congestion in about five minutes simply by connecting up more 10Gbps ports on those routers. Simple. Something we’ve been asking Verizon to do for many, many months, and something other providers regularly do in similar circumstances. But Verizon has refused. So Verizon, not Level 3 or Netflix, causes the congestion. Why is that? Maybe they can’t afford a new port card because they’ve run out – even though these cards are very cheap, just a few thousand dollars for each 10 Gbps card which could support 5,000 streams or more. If that’s the case, we’ll buy one for them. Maybe they can’t afford the small piece of cable between our two ports. If that’s the case, we’ll provide it. Heck, we’ll even install it.
Emphasis mine.
The Comcast deal may be entirely different, I have little doubt the technical aspects were at least partially different, but I suspect the motivations were the same.
See, that's what they *did* and that's what pushed this change. Netflix didn't want to pay to put rack space in because it costs more, that raises their prices and their customers don't care about latency at all. A half second is huge in internet response times but customers couldn't care less if it their movie took an extra half second to start. Rather than give Netflix the bigger connection it needed to make it's customers happy, even when Netflix offered to pay for it, Comcast refused. That way they could force Netflix to pay Comcast extra money in order for Comcast customers to get decent Netflix service.
Your average consumer believes that the bandwidth they pay for each month reflects how fast their ISP will carry traffic to them. Comcast realized that they could sell that idea to the consumer and then not provide it and the average consumer wouldn't know or blame them. Then they could demand money from content providers.
We do want CDNs, but we want them provided because they improve service that people care about, not because ISPs refuse to give their customers sufficient access to content providers in order to make more money.
The courts have recently been unkind to software patents. Google has lots of money for lawyers and they could spend less on lawyers than they're paying Microsoft if some (any?) of the patents were to be invalidated. Google has agreements with MS that may hinge partially on not going to court with them. However, a win for Kyocera could save them mucho dinero.
Google may be able to support Kyocera without breaking their agreements and it could be a big win for them without jeopardizing anything except money. They have money to spare.
Not so much "demand" as "cite."
It helps if you're humming A-Team theme music while you read it.
I tell them to turn to the study of mathematics, for it is only there that they might escape the lusts of the flesh. -- Thomas Mann, "The Magic Mountain"
