And somehow you have missed my point that whenever the government gets involved it is to the detriment of the consumer who cannot afford to employ lobbyists and other influence peddlers that the large corporations can.
I have heard numerous arguments for so called "Net Neutrality" over the years but think about it. Do you really want the government forcing telecoms to treat ALL web traffic the same? Would that mean the lowliest customer gets the same bandwidth as the greatest? Just how much do you want to socialize the internet? Sure it seems like a small imposition, just to make sure they open all ports and don't throttle any. But eventually there will be special internet channels that come from the government at higher speed. Just so big-brother's face (or your J. Random Politician) can make sure everyone has unfettered access to official government sources.
Given the antics of the NSA and your favorite monolithic internet company collecting your data, allowing the government even more control over the internet seems a bit foolhardy.
Eventually it will work out so that even in small markets there will be more than one ISP. Pressure from consumers is already putting the brakes on some more monopolistic legislation in Kansas http://tech.slashdot.org/story.... A lot of people now have the choice to go to another ISP if they find some ports being blocked or "shaped" (doublespeak for throttled). When enough people switch, the offending ISP gets the message that they shouldn't be doing that.
If the government forces net neutrality then there will be less need for competition and less competition means worse service in the long run. It's much better in the rodeo than the stockyards.
The technology, known as "vehicle-to-vehicle," or "V2V," lets cars "talk" to each other and exchange safety data, such as speed and position. If a nearby car abruptly changes lanes and moves into another car's blind spot, the car would be alerted.
Federal transportation officials did not announce when the new regulations would go into effect but said they hope to propose the new V2V rules before President Barack Obama leaves office in January 2017"
Link to Original Source
We never had anything with enough power to break anything. We had to go to the strip and watch the nitro boys blow shit up.
This used to be called line lock. For 1/4 milers it was a help to get the engine revved up to the torque band while heating the rubber on the tires to get better traction. When the green light comes on you release the brakes and go.
When I was a kid we got tickets for negligent driving if we squealed the tires. The cops will have fun with this.
Perhaps this is why the FDA put the kabosh on it. I am for the free market but providing misleading or wrong interpretation is not a good thing. Since they'll be providing the raw data perhaps a market for a better analysis will spring up. Hopefully in another country beyond the gentle protections of the FDA.
Wouldn't a local caching DNS server solve that problem? Once a lookup is in the local cache there wouldn't be any DNS latency. Only new lookups would be delayed.
That the media in general is conflating Libertarian with criminal activities is more a sign of the general public being brainwashed in the government indoctrination camps (public schools) to believe that security is preferable to liberty.
AHA! Another product of the government monopoly on education. The Idea that left to themselves vendors would "game the system" to the detriment of the consumer is actually MORE prevalent under government granted monopolies that otherwise. It is up to the consumer to be aware of what he/she is getting for their money. However, people have been lulled into the false belief that the government is the great protector.
Corporations, without the involvement of government via corporate shield laws, tend to be evil because the individual stockholders are shielded from the evil actions of the corporation. Without this shielding, every owner would be liable for the wrongdoing and would take steps to prevent the evil. Corporations are inherently inhuman because, by law, a corporation is a "person" and that person is only entity liable for damages cause by the actions of the corporation. Only in cases of clear criminality can individuals be held liable while the stockholders have no liability at all.
You should pull your head out of the governments collective ass and learn how things work in the real world before you spout more of the drivel in your post.
Hasn't the government caused enough problems with granting monopolies to telecom companies. The whole industry needs to be totally deregulated. With deregulation comes competition and with competition comes better service and lower prices. The total over-regulation of telecom is the reason we have such lackluster service and higher costs. Telecom companies who have limited competition don't fear raising prices and don't need to improve service in order to attract new customers. Costs to business can be prohibitive. I still have clients that are still using ADSL (1.5 down and
Because governments limit the choices and regulate prices in a lot of cases we have crappy service. Can you imagine what it would be like if internet service were socialized? This country is already bankrupt. Can you imagine what a cluster f**k ObamaNet would be like? How about in Detroit?
Are you for real? Give me a break!
Remember, any government powerful enough to give you everything you want is powerful enough to take it all away!
Before I got my IMSAI (used) i had a KIM-1 which had 4 KB of ram on a 6502 microprocessor, a hex keypad and a 4 digit 7-segment numeric display. The built in ROM bios on the board could create some funky hex letters to make it show HEX.
Spent a lot of time playing Hunt the Wumpus.
Just get the government involved.