I don't believe it was a lie. That wouldn't make sense. I was already a customer and I told them I wasn't even going to move to that house, if I couldn't get internet. I stressed that point emphatically to them. Misinforming me cost them money too.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
Before I bought my house, I went down to the Comcast office to confirm that I would be able to get broadband there. Multiple people told me yes, but I still wanted to speak to a manger, just to be sure. And they did assure me, over and over again. So I bought the house, moved in, and then they finally told me it wasn't available yet.
Since I was doing software consulting from home, at the time, I made it clear to them that I wasn't going to move there if I couldn't get it. I ended up going over a year before they decided to turn it on (the wiring was all there, it was a new development). It really hurt my business, at the time. I'm still bitter about it to this day. I couldn't have been any more thorough in checking before moving in. They are absolutely incompetent.
It ain't that hard to turn 30 into 80.
People who have enough of an opinion to vote aren't going to be swayed by ads nearly as much as those, who had no interest in voting in the first place. These are the types of people who will more likely vote for the most familiar brand name.
If anything, we should be going in the other direction. If you can't name the vice president, or you don't know which party controls the senate, you should lose your right to vote, until you do. We need better informed voters, not less informed.
That would be the freedom of assembly portion. You don't lose your 1st amendment rights because of who you associate with.
If Netflix wants to provide a premium experience for their customers, then let them pay for the equipment and pass the cost on to their customers. If Comcast now has to treat everyone equally, then everyone gets the lowest common denominator.
They do let you hit them and even exceed them form time to time. It's never been an issue for me. But that all goes aways, once they moved to tiered.
In other words, #2 means they'll do away with unlimited and move to tiered access. #3 means that Netflix will flood and congest the rest of the network, meaning longer buffering times for all. And of course, #1 was never a realistic worry.
It started with Civilization 5 last summer. It got me to install Steam. I ended up buying about eight games since. I'd probably buy a lot more games, if more of them supported Linux. We have money too, ya know.
Ubuntu is geared more toward people who don't care much about managing the boot details. So I think it might make sense for them. I chose my distro based on how much control it gave me. And luckily, they still seem committed to OpenRC. When it comes to booting, keep it simple!
And replace the greyish void fog with the true blue void of death.
We're not other countries. Our government is the most corrupt institution on the planet.
Why would you think a government, that couldn't roll out a website, after spending over $2 billion, could effectively manage something far more complex?
Will he just start over again, with a new kernel?
Save the major version bumps for large refactorings.
Yeah, it looks like they didn't exactly allow the netflix's servers in their data centers, but they are establishing a direct connection to those data centers as part of a paid deal.
Since they can't do that with everybody, I'm assuming they'll have to stop doing this for Netflix and we go back to lower quality/slower buffering times.
Interesting, given that he used to lobby for Verizon and Verizon just pulled the plug on FiOS expansion. Not sure what to make of that.