Spring RTS Engine

http://ipower.ning.com/netneutrality
...

I believe this site to overstate the problem.

Not that there isn't a problem.

This is actually all initiated by bill gates, because he hates google and a crappy internet will hurt google more than it hurts MS.

True story! Honestly


Anyone who understands free markets should be able to know that this is bullshit.
People dont want to pay for a limited number of sites, maybe a closed system such as this could be marketed as 'free internet', but the cost of actual full internet access is already so low that people will never pay for a restricted version of it.

someone will come along and offer net neutral internet as a feature and everyone will flock to it, the same thing happened with all you can eat monthly payments

I imagine it would be somewhat inconvinient for multibillion dollar companies like valve, blizzard, google, microsoft, and pretty much any company ever that actually makes sales online. The majority of them wouldn't be included on the "lists". Not to mention the firebombs. And there WILL be firebombs, and murders, many of them. Telling people they can't visit SA or 4chan any more is pretty much suicide.

it must be true if it's on the internets

that chick has pretty nice cleavage

I'd be on the front line with my sniper pellet gun if they actually tried to do something like that. Lucky for them they know never to go against a godlike force of justice like me.

Over the last 10 minutes I've had 2 beers, still nothing. The offensive words flow a little more easily but that's it. After watching Kotaku's "GTA4 drunk driving" video I'd have though I'd be feeling something by now.... I guess my samsonlike self is truly immune to all forms of attack. Who would dare stand against me, I, who dual-wield.

Will be back in a few minutes, going to do 4 shots and see what that does for me.

Still nothing.

No, wait, I can't feel my tongue or throat.

...Damn this would be a bad time to find out I'm allergic to Jack Daniels.


Edit: Nah, I'm fine.

This is all on an empty stomach, I should mention. Haven't eaten since 5:20 AM, it is now 5:29 PM.

Edit 2: Opening ANOTHER Labatt Maximum Ice (7.1% alcohol)
That puts me up to 144 mL of alcohol just from the beer, then another 4 overflowing shots of Jack Daniels (40%)... What a rip.

Edit 3: Aha! My head just got heavy. What else you got, alcohol? Seriously, you better make me see pink elephants or something at least.

Crap, left my supper in the microwave... gotta go grab it.

Comp1337 wrote:that chick has pretty nice cleavage

^ I agree with this. ^

I disagree with the ideas of these people. Nobody will ever limit the internet. Really, imagine the havoc that would be loosened upon the world...

TBH, I'm not terribly worried about this. It'd be economic suicide for whoever tried it, I suspect.

The minute that ISPs do this, their competitors will just start advertising that they don't, and people will switch to their services. Talk about an easy sale- "like YouTube? Hate censorship? Come use FreeWeb, the 'real Internet experience'". And they'd be able to charge a little more, too- people would happily pay an extra $5 / month, just to be able to surf the entire Web.

The real problem, imo, is the large areas of the world where only one provider exists, so there isn't any real competition to keep providers from pulling these kinds of stunts. That's an issue of government, basically.

The real worry is if any of the media giants get control over enough of the world's fiber to force this down our throats. The infrastructure for the speedy wireless networks able to compete with the fiber trunks doesn't really exist yet, at least here in the USA.

I believe the "talks" were more like "you're making so much money from our users, we want a part of that!" (e.g. ISPs demanding money from Google) which is completely ignoring that the ISP's customers are on the service exactly to use those other sites and that without them the ISP wouldn't have customers in first place.

I believe the "talks" were more like "you're making so much money from our users, we want a part of that!" (e.g. ISPs demanding money from Google) which is completely ignoring that the ISP's customers are on the service exactly to use those other sites and that without them the ISP wouldn't have customers in first place.

That makes a lot more sense yeah, although it will still not happen. In every industry the profit margins vary alot from top to bottom. In holland we currently have angry farmers who spray their milk across the land because the profit margins of the supermarkets are a lot higher than what they make. Fact is that if you want to make more money you have to stop making a commodity and start providing something original. It's the same for ISPs, they have no leverage anyway.

Our milk farmers are doing the same over here.

jcnossen wrote: That makes a lot more sense yeah, although it will still not happen. In every industry the profit margins vary alot from top to bottom. . . .. It's the same for ISPs, they have no leverage anyway.

I hope you are right.

Huh? That article is about metered internet usage, pay 1$/gig if you download more than some limit... ISPs have always been providing such packages. What does it have to do with the thread?

seemed like they are leaning in that direction and I have never seen such a package in the states.

They're quite common actually... you should talk to fox

An ISP here in the states would go out of business in a day if they tried to pull that crap.

Free market competition is good for consumers.

If time warner cable tried that I would be on at&t or comcast the same day. Not gonna be having that bull.

Forboding Angel wrote:An ISP here in the states would go out of business in a day if they tried to pull that crap.

Free market competition is good for consumers.

If time warner cable tried that I would be on at&t or comcast the same day. Not gonna be having that bull.

don't many areas have a service provider which basically has a monopoly