Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:It's ok (Score 1) 56

Think of it like a private highway where people who drive chevrolet cars have to go 5 miles per hour - not because they didn't pay the fee's/taxes to use the highway, but because the highway company actively wants to destroy chevrolet as a competitor.

That's essentially what Comcast was doing to Netflix a couple years ago.

Comment Re:It's ok (Score 3, Interesting) 56

To expand on this - a lot of people are like "Trump is right people should have to pay for usage". Thing is - ISPs already pay for peering, and their customers already pay for access to the internet - that's already happening and normal. What isn't ok is degrading someone else's service because a paying customer of your is using a competitor's application or host.

Say like - Comcast intentionally slowing down the speed of Netflix because Netflix is competitor (Comcast probably views services like that as the literal end to their cable business).

This is net neutrality.

Comment Re:Take that corporate America! (Score 1) 191

That's a strawman - I'd be happy if banned Schmidt and Zuckerberg as well from influencing politics as well.

It will create jobs too - lawyers who will line up to start litigating end users.

Plus - get a job at any ISP - we already pay for peering - this isn't about that really - it's about companies being able to actively punish ISP's for NOT paying.

Comment Re:Well what did you expect? (Score 2) 138

If you have bitlocker configured - with a tpm+pin - it requires a pin to boot the machine (to do the windows upgrade to do the shift + f10 trick), say you do boot it - you'll still need a login - with local admin to run the update. And guess what - if you have local admin you can just switch off the protectors inside the existing version of windows. Plus most well run enterprises aren't going to allow the machine to be patched in this manner.

In other words - if your corporate security policies are even halfway sane - there's nothing to worry about.

Comment Re:What about the far-left? (Score 1) 978

Most jobs I've taken they do some sort of training on this, but it goes without saying that its always qualified "within reason". For instance if your religion involves wearing racist slogans on your cloths/skin, drugs, clothing that prevents you from wearing safety gear - your employer doesn't have to put up with that. If your pregnant and you work in construction and your employer can't make reasonable accommodations for this - they don't have to put up with it.

I think most people would take some offense at any shop that said "no liberals, no conservatives, no pro gay (conservatives or liberals), no anti-gay" signs on their door. I think the bakery incident came down to the fact that the state of Oregon prohibits sexual discrimination, and so does the federal government - and it wasn't a significant burden on them to make a cake. There would be zero controversy if that same bakery did this to a black or Mexican person. There would probably be less controversy if a bakery refused to make a racist cake.

You know - a lot of it is up to the courts to decide what is reasonable or not. If you're a white supremacist on twitter - talk to your lawyer.

Slashdot Top Deals

There must be more to life than having everything. -- Maurice Sendak