Just consider that the "god" in question is the one you're reading at the time, and you'll feel better.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
Without federal regulation, yes. Without local government involvement, no. Without easement access (which is granted by the municipal government), the company running the fiber to the house needs to negotiate a separate land usage deal with every property owner between the house and the connection point.
And such classifications are at the discretion of the FCC.
If after reading all four pages you can still say the anti-net-neutrality folks don't have a point, your brain is off / mind closed.
This coming from the same schmucks who tried to pass off "payola" as a positive thing.
Last time I checked, the Internet was an Information Service. That designation was created by Congress for some reason... You can't have it both ways.
Are you still throwing that bullshit around? The last time you checked, it was an "Information Service" because the FCC reclassified it as an Information Service in 2003. It was under Title II before that, and moved OUT of that classification by the FCC.
I support regulation free internet. IF You want to fix the "Comcast vs Netflix" problem, fix the last mile problem first.
Those two statements are contradictory. The last mile is a natural monopoly.
It's only libel/slander/defamation if it's false information about a person. There are plenty of lies one can spread that don't fall under that umbrella.
I agree with you that it's not "trolling" though, and it wouldn't be caught by this simplistic bot, anyway.
I went through the same thing growing up. Bullying was real, not bullshit "mean words on a screen," and deciding not to bow down and take that shit anymore was a major turning point for me.
But somehow I survived. Maybe its because I'm made of better stuff than other people, but that sounds. I ike self-aggrandizing bullshit to me. Rather, I believe it's because I realized that I was only a victim of my own self-loathing, and upon that realization learned how to have the confidence to stand up for myself in the face of, for lack of a better term, typical human dickishness.
I suspect a sort of emotional antibacterial soap effect - thirty years of well-intentioned idiots, coddling and sanitizing reality for their precious little snowflakes makes sure they can't deal with (and this is, in fact, a great term) "typical human dickishness."
Only if you set it that way (if it even still has that setting). Otherwise it (and most of the other ad blocking extensions) prevent the connection from being made in the first place, which is what makes them worthwhile for users on metered data connections.
The proof is in how many different kinds of games are being made. That we have games which are massive franchises, that have been homogenized and distilled to appeal to the masses, yet we have games that are filling niche wants for gamers of certain types. We have games for people who are extremely hard core games, and games for those that are extremely casual. We have games targeting all skill levels, all types of play, and so on.
If that's your metric, then by your own definition of "golden age", your "objective proof" fails to support your assertion. The time period I spoke of elsewhere (mid-90s to early-naughties) was still more deserving of the title than what we have now. Both eras had their share of shovel-ware that made up the majority of the "variety" (Sturgeon's Law and all) but we haven't gotten any new "types" of games since the rise of the MMO with Everquest, other than perhaps the "non-game" art-games which DO legitimately fit GPs complaint about being (barely) interactive movies (Journey, Dear Ester, e.g.). The games we do get are either the homogenized, "safe" crap with some production value from the ever-consolidating established studios, warmed-over rehashes or navel-gazing self-indulgence from the independents, and cynical shovelware from mobile ad companies which come close to (or surpass) most objective definitions of "malware."
And there are some types which have been all but abandoned by both groups -- such as space combat simulators (XWing, Wing Commander, B5:IFH, e.g.) which belie that assertion, as well.
What we have now are the union of the manufactured mega-hits, console exclusives which might as well not exist for any player who can't/won't pay $1200 every five years, and indie developers putting out 9 turds for every diamond, all with the technology that the music and movie industries have been dreaming of for decades - the power to make every full-price purchase into a long-term rental, and our own version of the "loudness war"
What has happened is that various things have brought down barriers, so now small groups of people, or even single people, can create and compete in the games marketplace. The upshot is we get things for more interests, not just the mainstream.
That's hardly a new thing. That's the exact situation that caused the Atari crash.
The major paradigm shift has been smartphones, which opened up the "casual" market to people who might want to play games but not buy separate expensive equipment (consoles or a gaming-rated PC) and is largely dominated by the third group mentioned above. That doesn't make a "golden age" for anyone other than the people grubbing for money, and certainly not for the players.
Actually, L90 Optimus.
I'll be able to test it over the weekend. Crossing my fingers, but I at least have a fallback in that I can forward calls to her house line for free.
Thanks, that's helpful to know.
I just hope it solves the weird issue of my phone's Wifi freaking out (bouncing around with "Certificate Error Er01") like the rep suggested it would. Hard to use WiFi calling in that situation.
You have one? I've still got to get mine set up when I get up there again.
How is it different from your basic off-the-shelf dual-band wifi router? I assume (hope?) they do something with the software to make the phone work better?
I was more struck by the lack of an articles or possessives. It does sound more stunted than
"...but keeps revising in the likelihood that the request is denied" or somesuch.
They explain that. It's not to determine if the cadet (it was given in Starfleet Academy) knows how to handle a no-win scenario, it was to see HOW they handled it. There wasn't a pass/fail (except, I guess, if the cadet curled up under the captain's chair and cried or something), it was a personality assessment.