Forgot your password?

Comment: It doesn't matter which giant holds the power (Score 1) 107

Whether it's the ISPs or the big content providers: The bottom line is that eliminating net neutrality would cement the power structure and disallow smaller competitors to rise. It would essentially undermine the concept of free trade and equal footing for everyone to compete in a free market.

In the end, what would happen without net neutrality is that big content providers would have to pay ISPs. Either in form of protection money ("shame if anything happened to your fast pipe...") or in form of a bribe ("Ensure that this little upstart there gets 64kbit at best").

Comment: Re:Australia Deserves it. (Score 1) 46

What he tried to explain, and allow me to drive it home bluntly so it gets through some thick skulls: A right is pointless if you neither exercise it nor defend it. A right is never self serving. And whether you have it or not is not even being tested until you try to exercise it.

Essentially you can have any right, as long as you don't test it, you don't even know whether you'll really have it or not. Take the 3rd. Yes, the 3rd amendment. You know, the one where you needn't house soldiers. It's a bit silly today, ain't it? I mean, let's be reasonable here, if the country can't house its soldiers anymore... but let's take it as an example since it's one of the amendment nobody really gives a shit about anymore. As much as the Quartering Act (where the Brits forced the colonies to house soldiers whenever they pleased) was one of the reasons for the rebellion, there really is not any use for that particular amendment anymore.

But do you know whether it really applies? Or are there just no soldiers kicking you out of their bed and proclaiming it theirs 'cause the state currently has enough barracks? Sure, it's not the best example considering how easily the state could avoid infringing in this constitutional law, all it takes is build some kind of shelter for its soldiers.

But let's take a step back and look at the second. Do you have it? Or do you have it as long as you're not really a nuisance, much akin to the first where you're allowed to practice your free speech today mostly where you cannot be heard? The funny (or not so funny) thing is that the first WAS tested. And now we have "free speech zones".

I guess should anyone ever test the second, we'll get "free shooting zones".

Comment: Re:So, America *needs* traitors? (Score 1) 190

by Opportunist (#47537185) Attached to: The Department of Homeland Security Needs Its Own Edward Snowden

How's that in any way remotely comparable to 1914? Those are local conflicts, and if any "global player" is involved, then it is hardly anything more than a "let's stomp them" action being performed 'cause they didn't do what their masters liked.

Name ONE SINGLE conflict since WW2 where two equal forces with global impact clashed.

War's so 20th century. Bullying (a powerful entity beating a powerless one back to the stone age) and terrorism (a powerless entity instilling fear in a powerful one) are the types of conflict for this age.

Comment: Re:Customer service? (Score 1) 789

"spazzies"? Really? You know, before the car accident that screwed me up, I was perfectly normal. Now that they've done surgery to correct the issue, I'm perfectly normal, with a little extra titanium hardware. We're all one car accident away from having the same issues. That is, unless you never leave your mother's basement.

Comment: They'd just have to copy T-Mobile's business model (Score 2) 63

by tepples (#47535727) Attached to: Compromise Struck On Cellphone Unlocking Bill

The carriers now will say that they have to raise prices or even completely do away with contract subsidies in order to be competitive.

Then they'd have to compete with their MVNOs and T-Mobile USA, all of which have been itemizing the hardware and the service for years. Prepaid MVNOs have always sold the phone up front, and even before T-Mobile branded itself "the un-carrier", it had the SIM-only "Even More Plus" plan that offered a discount for bringing a compatible phone or buying one up front.

Comment: Re:I don't see what good unlocking does (Score 1) 63

by tepples (#47535631) Attached to: Compromise Struck On Cellphone Unlocking Bill

Having the opportunity to handle a phone before buying it varies on a case-by-case basis so much that I'm not quite sure why you mentioned it.

Because of this comment. I asked about being able to try an AOSP phone before I buy it, and someone replied that I sounded like an entitled whiner.

panic: kernel trap (ignored)