Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re: Rinse. Repeat. (Score 1) 351

There's no evidence that they were caused by video games, but for all we know Mario Kart is a mental time bomb.

I see what you did there. Let me help you along:

There's no evidence they were caused by liberals, but for all we know progressivism is a mental time bomb.
There's no evidence they were caused by immigrants, but for all we know Mexicans are a mental time bomb.
There's no evidence they were caused by Microsoft, but for all we know Azure is a mental time bomb.
There's no evidence they were caused by Putin, but for all we know Siberia is a mental time bomb.

You can "what if" till you're blue in the face, but for all the studies that have been done attempting to prove a link between video game and real life violence, the fact that there has been no evidence found is rather telling. I'd be more tempted to believe one of the ones (just one) I listed than your video game violence link...

Comment Re: Good Schools (Score 1, Informative) 326

"Free" healthcare. Sure. "Free." You pay a fee for an ambulance, you pay hospital fees for some things, and the medication you need ends up not being covered by the "all medications for people under 25 are free" program that the lying, idiot Wynne government puts in place.
Then on top of that, you'really paying outrageous taxes for everything, and needed surgeries can take literally years to schedge.
I'd rather pay premiums for a system that works, TYVM.

Comment Re:somebody stop us from being so evil! (Score 1) 308

You're missing one fact: Corporations are also arrogant. Nobody foresees their own downfall.
Google, CloudFlare, et al don't want to have to pay Comcast millions of dollars that will keep competition out, because they don't think anybody can compete with them anyway. That's why the content providers are protesting the removal of net neutrality.

They may be right. Net neutrality will certainly keep them innovating, because if they don't, they could be surpassed in the market. But lack of net neutrality isn't something they want, either, because it will cost them money.

Comment Re:somebody stop us from being so evil! (Score 1) 308

You're either completely clueless, or intentionally stupid. If it's the first, I'll explain it to help you out:

Amazon, Google, Facebook, etc, are not the target of net neutrality legislation. They are content providers, that provide or host the content that you view on the Internet.
Comcast, Verizon, etc are Internet Service Providers (ISPs). They are the target of net neutrality legislation. They provide your connection to the Internet, not the content that you view on the Internet.
Think of it as the difference between the road, and your grocery store. You get groceries (content) from the grocery store (content provider), and use the road (ISP) to get to the grocery store.

The issue is that with net neutrality, Comcast has to provide their customers equal access to both Google and MyNextGenSearchEngine.com. This means if Google gets slow and sloppy and stops innovating, then MyNextGenSearchEngine.com can come in with a better idea and start taking market share from Google, by providing a better product.

Without net neutrality, Comcast can say to Google "Give us $1 million dollars a year to get access to our customers." and Google will be able to pay it. When Comcast then goes to MyNextGenSearchEngine.com, which is run by two university grad students out of their garage, they can't afford $1 million, so Comcast blocks or degrades their site performance.
When Comcast customers then go to MyNextGenSearchEngine.com, they either get nothing at all, or a very slow site. Comcast customers will then favour Google, even though MyNextGenSearchEngine.com may be a much better search experience, solely because Google had the money to pay to Comcast.

Keep in mind, Comcast is already being paid by their own customers for Internet access, so the possibility is that they will be charging the customer for access, to the Internet, then charging Google for access to the customer. Google already pays for their own Internet access, but they'll also be paying ISPs that they do not use directly, just so that ISPs customers are able to access Google.

Going back to the grocery store example: If the roads were privately owned, then the road owners could ask for what amounts to basically protection money from the grocery stores, or the road going to their store would be torn up and under construction for months or years, with only a single lane in and out. The big stores would be able to pay this money, but a new specialty grocery store wouldn't, so no customers would be able to drive to their store.

It basically entrenches the big players, not allowing the smaller, less financially powerful startups to get a foothold.

Comment Re:No need to break the laws (Score 1) 308

Of course, because left-wingers, like all these Hollywood directors and actors being accused of sexual harassment, are all paragons of virtue.

</sarcasm>

For crying out loud, how much evidence do you need before you finally figure out that it's not right or left wing that's the problem. It's the powerful and elite that like to screw over everybody, regardless of political leanings. Don't give the powerful more power. If you don't regret it right away, you're setting a precedent that you will regret eventually.

Comment Re:The Bastard Child of Castro (Score 1) 244

Well, if Net Neutrality disappears, then the tiny forum website that allows people who are gay men for 6 days a week, but identify as lesbiantranspostandrogynousmiscellanouswhydoihaveapenis on Tuedays to chat with others like them might not be reachable, so the 2 people who qualify for this in the entirety of Canada would be horribly oppressed.

Slashdot Top Deals

Kleeneness is next to Godelness.

Working...