But President Obama decided “net neutrality” was good politics, so he demanded that the commission impose the most extreme form of regulation.
Get pumped! Come see it this Sunday Sunday Sunday! Right off Exit Eleventy-Four +7i, take the first left through the trans-dimesnional barrier because it is so Extreme, it's in a completely different universe.
It's just a more recent frontier of the Commons that business wants exclusive right to exploit at little or no cost, and sell you what they get out of it at a significant markup while externalizing all other costs and consequences. Treatment of employees and customers to taste.
Is someone really having this conversation? Hilarious.
That food humans burn? Carbon dioxide taken from the air to build biomass by primary producers in our food chains. We don't just create carbon ex nihilo. We aren't adding anything to the system by respiring.
It's not about kowtowing to USAmerica, it's about sensible network architecture. there is a problem with the US in that regard, depending on where data might be stored, to such an extent that US companies keep data out of US agency-friendly places. Pretty sure Mike is totes aware of that. Moreover, everyone should have it both ways, and more, with governments ensuring the safety of everyone's data, not poking into it. And it is patently ridiculous to claim China is not problematic in this area, to the US, or anyone else, including China.
No, it isn't just you. There is some sort of broken mentality culture where morons make critical systems and infrastructure accessible over public IP networks. Then there is decades of hand-wringing and power and authority grabbing and privacy smashing so governments and corporations can produce a little theatre about making you safer instead of doing the one sensible thing and disconnecting that which never should have been connected in the first place, whether it is you car, or SCADA systems, or secret/private/sensitive data servers.
And if you have one half-decent developer and a management that does not contradict them, you wouldn't have such idiotic security flaws in the first place. It's like they go out of their way to make these systems vulnerable in ways the most moronic author of tech-in-fiction could not possibly make up.
Seems like a huge CYA or plea for work, not only downplaying GM's negligence (they weren't equipped, bullshit) but also making concerns like MS seem as though they were smart or quick to patch anything. It is to laugh.
Who the hell is qualified for jobs like that? I think that is part of the entire problem: No one is. There are positions in private and government organizations in which there is no possibility other than for the Peter Principle to be in effect due to the nature of the organizations themselves.
Re: Re: There _could_ be an interesting discussion in the comments here ...
Ignoring someone is not suppression. Even having a community pre-filtered "you may not want to bother looking at this spam" system is not suppression. Anyone can choose to see that speech.
But for mere appearances (because the only really lazy commenters here are the trollish sort, and anyone will actually open and read the comments) Techdirt could appease the conscience of free speech advocates by providing a fourth account setting to "never hide reported comments".