Help? They set up a website. Just because we know how to type a URL into an address bar and not the search bar and know to read the page to find the comment section, doesn't mean they gave unfair help. Just because they made sure that their website is working properly in what it's suppose to be doing, doesn't mean they helped the other side. Besides, isn't making sure the minority is heard affirmative action? Aren't republicans against affirmative action?

All workers in the foxconn buildings have been arrested after the implementation of the stress cams.

So... their argument is "Netflix would have done it first, so we have to do it sooner."?

my wife: "Not that we're surprised, but it's nice to have concrete facts to back it up."

"Out of over 9,000 staffers in the House, should we really be banning this whole IP range based on the actions of two or three? " Tell that to voter fraud bills, the claim of "welfare queens" and not allowing female reproductive rights because "some use it to be promiscuous". Not so fun now that it's on the other foot, is it? However, unlike those claims, they do have control of AND responsibility over their entire network. This IP ban is standard practice for IT security. If they can't secure their network, then they don't deserve access to the server. Access to servers are a privilege, not a right.

I do have a to agree in that the current development style/strategy (agile development) is less geared towards solid development and more on features and getting stuff out there. I think the article is just saying that they should do less of pushing out features and new things and more on good programming/fix known bugs. Of course putting out a bugless program is near impossible, but there's a difference in better prevention versus better clean-up.

yeah, this is what I thought they were doing. As big as verizon and comcast's data centers are, there's no way that they colo all of the data of all the content that netflix hosts. Not with the advantage of virtualized servers is allowing for caching and peering so that everyone, coming from different providers can still get the same content. That's not to mention that all the mentions of the deals between comcast and netflix mentioned direct peering, not colocation. http://arstechnica.com/busines... "News of a paid peering deal comes two days after a traceroute showed that the two companies were exchanging traffic with each other directly."

Wait... since netflix has direct connection to verizon, and I doubt netflix's amazon cloud servers discriminate between comcast and verizon connections. And if there is a slow down and it's only on verizon customers, why do you think it's netflix that undersized the connections? I mean, sure netflix could, but it would simpler and easier solution is that they didn't. Besides, if verizon is providing the bandwidth they said they did, instead of threatening to sue, why don't they just show logs/graphs of how much data is being pushed through and how fast. I'm sure they have splunk or cacti graphs somewhere.

any and all podcast grabbers, twitter, flicker, friendster, eharmony... let's see... what other social/popular sites do people keep tell me to join.... There needs to be a law where if you are going to sue for tech patent infringement, you need to sue all the companies that have infringed at once or none at all.

In related news. Bush vows to hold his breath until his face turns blue in protest of the house not being bipartisan by giving him exactly what he wants.

I haven't been in American that long (only almost 20 years). Has there been a worse president than this guy?