"If there's any way to tell a phone to not ever use 2G."
In most cases, not easily. If you're using Android, there are a couple of options that I know of, but they require root access. One is to replace the stock OS with Cyanogenmod, which lets you control that directly.
If you can't use Cyanogenmod, then there is another option (this is what I do): using Tasker and a little magic, you can run custom scripts every time the protocol changes. My script notifies me that it has changed, and if it changed to 2G then it attempt to change back. If that fails, it disables the cell radio entirely (as if it were in Airplane Mode), then polls periodically to see if it can connect to 3G or better yet.
I'm unaware of an easily downloadable app that can accomplish all of this, but it probably exists somewhere. For my purposes, the Tasker solution is just fine.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I can't believe there is a discussion
"They are not "getting out of hand" when companies sue for lost expected profits. They are working as intended."
Those are not mutually exclusive. I understand that they are not getting out of hand from the point of view of the corporations. But they are absolutely getting out of hand from the point of view of everybody else.
"They are not "getting out of hand" when they do what they are supposed to do."
Sure they are, when what they are supposed to do is to be out of hand.
He's claiming that self-driving cars require constant communications with a server somewhere outside the car in order to work?? Even if network communications were 100% reliable, that's an incredibly unacceptable requirement for safety, reliability, and privacy reasons.
"if Netflix enforces regional discrimination, how does that work?"
Probably like it works right now. Netflix specifically forbids the use of VPNs to connect to their service, and if they catch you, they will disconnect you. They apparently don't put a ton of effort into doing this, but they catch people by monitoring connections that come from certain VPN IP address ranges.
I think that giving false testimony should incur penalties that are more severe than the crime they're testifying about. Further, when the police themselves do this, the penalties should be even worse than that. A LOT worse.
We give the police powers and authorities beyond what the average citizen has. The courts give the cops the benefit of the doubt about truthfulness. Given that, when cops betray that trust by being deceptive, the damage done is far, far worse than under other circumstances and should therefore be punished far, far more harshly.
"their constituents are all so partisan that they're afraid to question the actions of their own representatives."
This seems an unlikely explanation, since most of the members of either party are not actually as partisan as this implies. I interpret it a bit differently: I think that most people fall into one or two categories.
One (the largest group) is the people who just want to live their lives and have their hands full doing so. They don't have the time or energy to put into politics except when there's an issue that they perceive directly and immediately harms them.
The other is a very large group of people who believe that they are powerless and that nothing they can do will actually make anything better. They've given up.
I went through a few of those links you provided, but none of them are examples of what I was asking for: of where Techdirt's position was that simply because a law is old, it's bad.
In all of the links I looked at in that list, the age of the law was certainly discussed, but also the actual, practical reasons why the law was objectionable. I don't see an example of anyone arguing that a law is bad purely due to age.
Satellite is awful. i don't think it should really qualify as broadband, personally, but it doesn't require local physical infrastructure to work. Performance-wise, though, it's really only one step up from dialup.
I think the general consensus was that Rome "fell" (a process that took a long, long time) as a direct result of its military belligerence. They ended up having more frontage than they could economically defend.