Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Americans shoudln't subsidize internet service (Score 1) 318

by OzPeter (#47937679) Attached to: FCC Chairman: Americans Shouldn't Subsidize Internet Service Under 10Mbps

Why do you feel entitled to to decide that rural inhabitants should enjoy more internet and less live sport events?

Because in general sports franchises could pay for new stadiums out of petty cash, but still demand subsidies for said stadiums.

Comment: Re:Americans shoudln't subsidize internet service (Score 2) 318

by OzPeter (#47936063) Attached to: FCC Chairman: Americans Shouldn't Subsidize Internet Service Under 10Mbps

And that's kind of the point. Where nature/reality/market dictates the different availability of certain services, let people who choose to live there absorb those consequences. Don't protect them from the consequences of their choices. They're adults, and will adapt.

Except that there are benefits to society as a whole by having these people live in rural areas.

Comment: Re:Americans shoudln't subsidize internet service (Score 2) 318

by OzPeter (#47935829) Attached to: FCC Chairman: Americans Shouldn't Subsidize Internet Service Under 10Mbps

No. I would simply not support subsidizing them.

And in doing you are implying that market conditions should dictate the availability of such services in rural areas. However the cost of such services is increased by the fact that they are being provided in rural areas compared with more densely populated areas. In addition the effect of this cost is exacerbated by depressed earnings in rural areas compared with metropolitan earnings. Thus by removing all subsidies you are reducing the ability of people in rural areas to enjoy the same levels of service as people in metropolitan areas. Which will create a society of Haves vs Have Nots based on location. In effect condemning the Have Nots to a sub standard living compared to the Haves. This is not begging the question .. its a direct consequence of your desired policy.

And while you can't expect to have everything available in rural areas, increasing access to fundamentals such as power, water, health care, education and now internet service benefits the country as a whole. However you seems to have philosophy that its is OK to stratify society based on location. I disagree and think that the job of a country is to raise up all members of its society regardless of where they live.

Now if you want to talk subsidies for sports stadiums .. then yeah .. they should go.

Comment: Re:as good as a pair of pliers to drive in a nail (Score 1) 110

by OzPeter (#47925875) Attached to: A DC-10 Passenger Plane Is Perfect At Fighting Wildfires

Why not use the right tool for the job. A *REAL* firefighting airplane.
The CL415 is *designed* for that purpose.
It can reload in 12 second by scooping over any body of water just 6 feet deep. How long does it take to reload a DC-10?

If only there lakes full of fire retardant that a plane could just fly down to and scoop up a full load in a mere 12 seconds.

Comment: Re:Obvious (Score 1) 73

by OzPeter (#47916501) Attached to: NSW Police Named as FinFisher Spyware Users

There are a lot of Muslims in Australia, and it makes sense to keep an eye on them as a lot of them support terrorism

That seems like an obvious trolling comment, but sadly I'm not sure.

You just need to look at the Rise up Australia party for that. (Run by the same person as the "Catch the fire" ministries in Melbourne)

Comment: Re:So-to-speak legal (Score 2) 417

by OzPeter (#47907985) Attached to: Comcast Allegedly Asking Customers to Stop Using Tor

I would sue them for defamation, if I were one of their Tor-using customer.

It's a grave offence to imply someone is engaged in criminal activity, without actually having evidence of such activity.

And in what public venue did they announce this scurrilous rumor?
And what are the actual damages that you suffered from said announcement (and being butthurt is not a valid damage)
And assuming that you can satisfy the above, how much $$ do you have upfront to pay for a lawyer to take on your defamation case?

You may get the EFF interested, but I don't think that the case would even go anywhere unless there was actual damages involved.

Comment: Re:Requirements ? (Score 2) 129

by OzPeter (#47904717) Attached to: Chrome For Mac Drops 32-bit Build

Switching to 64 bit builds means that they will have to drop OSX 10.6, right? It's about time this one is left behind!

No, 64 bit builds run on 10.6 just fine. You may be confused here: 10.7 requires a 64 bit processor. So if you don't support 10.6, then supporting 32 bit is pointless - anything running 10.7 upwards supports 64 bit.

But there is also the corner case of machines like I have with a 64 bit capable CPU but only 32 bit EFI for which I am endlessly trapped on Lion (10.7). Which probably doesn't count in this case, but is always a source of endless bitching for me.

Real Users never know what they want, but they always know when your program doesn't deliver it.