Using "ip address, user agent and screen resolution" is extremely unreliable - think any kind of organised environment like a corporate network, cybercafe, educational campus etc. They will usually have standardized hardware and software so all of the above will match.

There's a difference between a spam lawsuit and a criminal investigation, for a serious enough crime that absolutely will happen. There will also be prosecutions brought against the ISP for failing to identify the subscriber as various laws require them to do. If an ISP isn't complying with this requirement today they are gambling and could face severe penalties.

The primary reason botnets target random home devices is because of shared ip addresses.
Earlier botnets targeted servers (more bandwidth etc), but these are trivially blocked. Once you have shared addressing you can't blanket block it without upsetting users, so you end up with login requirements or operators being forced to accept some level of malicious traffic.

If you have static addressing, and your address space earns a reputation for non malicious activity then you have a much easier life. This still doesn't help them track individual users beyond "non malicious users and not bots come from this range" as they still have no idea how many devices, how many individuals, how many roaming users etc exist. A static address block could represent an individual household, it could represent a company or an educational establishment, or a public venue like a bar or cafe etc.

The idea that companies track you based on IP is a fallacy, they use cookies and similar technologies. Even if everyone had static addressing at home and companies like google could guarantee this was the case globally, people still travel so the same device can pop up from multiple different locations with wildly different source addresses. I have multiple devices at home, but on the same VLAN they originate from the same IPv6 /64. Sites like google consider them different users, and even guess completely different physical locations for them which are hundreds of km apart.

Having a shared IP is a hassle, and a frequently rotating one isn't far behind.

Just because you have a unique IP, doesn't mean external companies know who it belongs to unless the ISP informs them.

Allowing them to track you will actually alleviate the anti-bot problems, as they can identify you as a known user. The anti-bot measures kick in when you are a *new* user as far as the system is concerned.
If you are a new user from a new ip then you get some leeway, if you are a new user from a previously seem ip then you look more malicious as bots will never retain cookies as if the bots could be tracked they would be trivially banned, and will always show as multiple users from the same address.

Depending on your location you will probably find that this extensive logging is mandated by law. And since the logging is being done anyway, the ISP will look for ways to recoup the costs which often involve selling the data.
You think organisations like the MPAA will accept a response of "well it could be any one of 50 different users" and just give up? Absolutely not, they will either go after all 50 users with threats, or go after the ISP etc.

Europol gave a presentation on this:
https://ripe74.ripe.net/presen...

The Europol investigation also highlights a "could be any of 50 users" problem which resulted in 49 innocent people being intrusively investigated for a serious crime committed by someone else. If you're concerned about privacy you absolutely don't want a shared IP because then you're either facing detailed logging or possible intrusive investigation through no fault of your own.

Dictators are bad. There's no way around it.

And frankly I think you are probably braindead for defending dictators. I don't know what your problem is or why you would do that. Even if you are communist, defending a dictator is anti-proletariat.

Hence my comment about poor implementation, your ISP is doing something wrong.
For most of the world, cgnat causes all kinds of problems with youtube and other sites.

What

I can see your genius showing through. I especially admire your citation.

Elections usually have observers from both parties to make sure this kind of thing doesn't happen.

So ok, these are the kinds of election frauds that could happen, or have happened historically.

If we're going to be scientific about it, we should ask, "Where were the Republican observers? What is there testimony about what happened?" Any attempt to ignore the hundreds of observers that were present is just unscientific nonsense.

The rise of populism in Europe is a real trend.

Populism isn't automatically a bad thing: it just means that the general public is being represented (or appealed to). Obama was populist, and he was fine, literally the best US president of the century and it's not even close.

Populism combined with the belief that your country can conquer the world is a bad thing (like what Hitler did). But a knee-jerk anti-populist attitude is not nuanced enough.

I will also add that Ian Bremmer seems to see trade deals as an important part of Pax Americana, but it isn't. "Liking America" is also not Pax Americana. Pax Americana isn't a popularity contest.

Pax Americana happens because countries have a moderately reasonable belief that if they invade their neighbor, America will do something to stop them. When that belief is gone, Serbia will immediately invade Kosovo.

Before you assign the F.C.C. as further example of the Trump administration, that the F.C.C. is behind the design and operation of this Satellite, go back and read the F.C.C. document. https://docs.fcc.gov/public/at...

They are granting a station license.

Any time a satellite is launched, if it has communication abilities - all do - the regulatory agencies of the world must be in approval. A station license is granted. This satellite needs coordination, and that the F.C.C. coordinating the frequencies in use, and granting them station licenses does not makes them part of the design and operation. I have F.C.C. granted station licenses, as long as I work in the frequencies the license grants, and comply with the modes of operation allowed, they don't have anything to do with my stations.

This coordination happens on everything launched, not just communications satellites. And seriously, unless the satellite never transmits, it needs coordination. RF does not know political parties.

3 million years of evolution fucktard

Almost as funny as people who think that the RF spectrum is political.

Make no mistake. The only thing the F.C.C has to do with this satellite is assigninging the Frequencies it communicates on. they have nothing to do with anything else. It has nothing to do with Trump, Obama, Bush II Clinton, or any political party. It has nothing to do with the design or use of the satellite. It has everything to do with RF, keeping radio signals away from each other.

Anyone using it as a further example and source of outrage for their hatred of a country, that this is politics - is only showing that they know nothing about what they are talking about.

"I know what it feels like to leave id while id goes on. It's a strange and painful thing to step away "

They aren't "stepping away" John. They are being kicked to the fucking curb

Read the official F.C.C. pdf document in TFS. Rather than gaslighting anyone, the F.C.C. is simply doing what they do, asked for frequencies to communicate on, they provided them in conjunction with the NTIA. This action is performed in conjunction with the similar organizations in other countries.

Has nothing to do with politics. Has everything to do with keeping RF emitters from interfering with each other. RF is not concerned with political parties. It is one area where there must be coordination between countries.

Now onto gaslighting - TFA is a fine example of exactly that. An article which paints the F.C.C as somehow being an integral part of this solar reflector is top tier gaslighting. The people in here, in their zeal, yet know almost nothing about the F.C.C or RF, yet demand that it is somehow evil.

RF is how I make my money, and people who know almost nothing about it yet make sweeping pronouncements about it are big gaslighters.

But when the Russians did the same thing, they were just being smart?

Many people in here apparently missed the part that the F.C.C. has absolutely nothing to do with the mirror itself. The F.C.C. has made a conditional grant for the frequencies used in communication, in concordance with the NTIA. And the payload is irrelevant. Other countries have similar groups to coordinate RF emitters.

One does not launch satellites without that coordination, you have to let them know where you plan on emitting RF. Or just as likely, ask where you can.

Why is this? https://www.ntia.gov/sites/def...

I have that chart printed on my wall in a large frame. Occasionally people come in wanting a chunk of RF to operate on. Many have trouble understanding just how crowded the RF spectrum is, and I refer them to the chart. "Pick a frequency". And that turns out to be way beyond their ability.

I don't do it to be contrary, but to educate them that this is seriously non-trivial. Especially when people don't know how RF acts. It is an unruly beast that has wildly different characteristics depending on frequency, and it beats with other frequencies to produce new frequencies outside its allocation.

The mirror sat itself is just a mirror sat, there is perhaps some data to be gathered from its deployment, but this company will find out just as the Russians did, that it is of limited utility. It is on a fast moving satellite, it doesn't provide all that much light, and then there is the clouds and stuff that block the sky.

But the F.C.C. and NTIA are just doing their jobs, which has nothing to do with the purpose of the sat, only keeping the spectrum operating. Just like with every other satellite for every different purpose.