The government is the freaking dragon.

Topic: The government is the freaking dragon. (Read 33642 times)

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #100 – 2016-04-05, 19:24:03

Quote from: midnight raccoon on 2016-04-05, 08:08:45

Is this what you mean? Her problem isn't necessarily that Netflix is doing this, but that they didn't tell the customers about it. She notes Netflix is is exploring options to let AT&T and Verizon customers choose their video quality.

From there:

Quote

A DVD quality stream needs 3Mbps, and HD is around 5Mbps.

I think that should read "Netflix' low-quality DVD resolution stream needs 3Mbps, and its low-quality HD resolution stream around 5Mbps."

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #101 – 2016-04-05, 23:52:52

Yes I know what you are saying about the smart mouth Oakdale but he has no divine right of opinion and that where we disagree that is part of life. That he chooses to talk rubbish is also his right but i don't have to go along with that either any more than he does for me!

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #102 – 2016-04-06, 03:15:36

Quote from: Frenzie on 2016-04-05, 19:24:03

I think that should read "Netflix' low-quality DVD resolution stream needs 3Mbps, and its low-quality HD resolution stream around 5Mbps."

Very true. Netflick also hickups on me with certain shows, especially Futurama. So I would go to speedtest.net and I'm getting plenty of bandwidth so I don't understand that part (other shows are just fine.)

Oakdale, the issue of service quality given to those wireless providers and the need for services such as T-Mobile's Binge-On are ones that will be resolved once the infrastructure catches up with all that's possible through the internet. The way technology moves, services such as Netflix will be just the beginning. The service providers that survive will be the ones that can build out the infrastructure, and it will will market forces not the government that kills the rest. In a couple decades people will say "Back in 2016, providers thought they could throttle bandwidth and direct folks only to certain content ?!? LOL"

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #103 – 2016-04-06, 09:28:07

Quote from: midnight raccoon on 2016-04-06, 03:15:36

Very true. Netflick also hickups on me with certain shows, especially Futurama. So I would go to speedtest.net and I'm getting plenty of bandwidth so I don't understand that part (other shows are just fine.)

Well, I'm not talking about that. Merely that 5Mbps is hardly HD quality even with the best of codecs. I reckon 15Mbps is really the minimum for quality that can be called decent (depending a bit on what it is you're watching, obviously).

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #104 – 2016-04-06, 10:05:47

It's hard for my crappy eyes to tell the difference with what you mean, unless the playback is really pixelated so Netflix looks fine to me on my little 10Mbps connection but someone with better eyes might notice something I can't.

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #105 – 2016-04-06, 10:19:16

Try watching a Blu-Ray.

Anyway, I didn't say it was horrible or anything. But quality and resolution are two very different things. I could grab any random DVD off my shelves and it might very well look better than your average Internet streaming HD resolution video.

Me, I care more about audio quality. A heavily aged VHS tape? Fine by me. Horrible low-bitrate mp3 audio? Get that @#$@#$ away from me. It hurts my ears.

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #106 – 2017-03-01, 22:12:38

Chairman of the FCC Pai is at it again, and in the Age of Trump™ he may get his way…

Quote

FCC chairman Ajit Pai said today that net neutrality was "a mistake" and that the commission is now "on track" to return to a much lighter style of regulation. The Verge adds:
"Our new approach injected tremendous uncertainty into the broadband market," Pai said during a speech at Mobile World Congress this afternoon. "And uncertainty is the enemy of growth." Pai has long been opposed to net neutrality and voted against the proposal when it came up in 2015. While he hasn't specifically stated that he plans to reverse the order now that he's chairman, today's speech suggests pretty clearly that he's aiming to. [...] Pai's argument is that internet providers were doing just fine under the old rules and that the new ones have hurt investment.
(Slashdot)

Here's the linked content…

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #107 – 2017-03-01, 23:49:53

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpbOEoRrHyU[/video]

And what's your personal take on the matter Oak?
Is it a good or is it a bad thing if net neutrality gets fucked up?
No need to give any reasons for your take, just a simple answer - "good" or a "bad".

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #108 – 2017-03-02, 05:26:38

Well, krake, sorry to disappoint but I have reasons.
"Net Neutrality" is one of those buzz terms: It's meaning belies its intent. Government control is what it actually means; which is to say, bureaucracy… (Always a good thing, right?

) I'd prefer to let the market make most decisions.
The idea that government officials (un-elected and un-accountable) make decisions that affect us all strikes me as — very European!
I'd not like to see such established as precedent here.

I understand trust-busting. But re-establishing Ma Bell ain't that.

What did Net Neutrality accomplish? What was it meant to accomplish?

Myself, I'm opposed to regulators being given free rein to impose strictures and "rules" on the fly…

This may seem merely a domestic concern. But it isn't. If we break the internet — give it over to state actors, including the U.S. — we (most of us) won't like the result.
Iran, Russia and China (sure, I could name many others) would like to "control" the internet; undoubtably, many in the U.S. government would, too. I don't think governments need to "control" the internet.
And each step they take towards doing so is, in my opinion, a misstep. The precedent is bad.

Do you recognize precedent as a determining factor of decision making?

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #109 – 2017-03-02, 08:26:22

Who knows, maybe your grandchildren will get someday the post modern world their granddad was so keen of...

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #110 – 2017-03-02, 21:41:30

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on 2017-03-02, 05:26:38

What did Net Neutrality accomplish?

The entire internet as we know it :p You still don't get we had net neutrality this whole time and it led to all the services we have today. Don't like net neutrality, here, enjoy your new AOL

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #111 – 2017-03-03, 21:35:39

Sang, free-wheeling regulation at the federal level is hardly neutral…

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #112 – 2017-03-08, 00:28:35

Typical unintended consequences (via Slashdot):

Quote

In response to a U.S. Justice Department order that requires colleges and universities make website content accessible for citizens with disabilities and impairments, the University of California, Berkeley, will cut off public access to tens of thousands of video lectures and podcasts. Officials said making the videos and audio more accessible would have proven too costly in comparison to removing them. Inside Higher Ed reports:
Quote
Today, the content is available to the public on YouTube, iTunes U and the university's webcast.berkeley site. On March 15, the university will begin removing the more than 20,000 audio and video files from those platforms -- a process that will take three to five months -- and require users sign in with University of California credentials to view or listen to them. The university will continue to offer massive open online courses on edX and said it plans to create new public content that is accessible to listeners or viewers with disabilities. The Justice Department, following an investigation in August, determined that the university was violating the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990. The department reached that conclusion after receiving complaints from two employees of Gallaudet University, saying Berkeley's free online educational content was inaccessible to blind and deaf people because of a lack of captions, screen reader compatibility and other issues.
Cathy Koshland, vice chancellor for undergraduate education, made the announcement in a March 1 statement: "This move will also partially address recent findings by the Department of Justice, which suggests that the YouTube and iTunes U content meet higher accessibility standards as a condition of remaining publicly available. Finally, moving our content behind authentication allows us to better protect instructor intellectual property from 'pirates' who have reused content for personal profit without consent."
(link)

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #113 – 2017-03-08, 03:17:30

What the unintented consquences of taking away the net neutrality, you know that evil thing that had been the default during the entire history of the internet and led to creation of the web as we know it?

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #114 – 2017-03-08, 19:15:43

Under the guise of "enforcing" net neutrality the FCC stifled parts of the market and stalled innovation… Or was that their intention?

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #115 – 2017-03-08, 20:11:54

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on 2017-03-08, 19:15:43

Under the guise of "enforcing" net neutrality the FCC stifled parts of the market and stalled innovation… Or was that their intention?

Source?

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #116 – 2017-03-08, 22:02:47

The "source" is whatever blog he read pulled out of their ass.

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #117 – 2017-03-08, 22:19:48

Quote from: midnight raccoon on 2017-03-08, 22:02:47

The "source" is whatever blog he read pulled out of their ass.

Yes, but there is a legit way to guide him by his own nose to that realisation.

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #118 – 2017-03-09, 04:59:53

Nah. You guys just don't get it: We're in the Age of Trump™! The Democrat meme "the importance of the charges" has taken control.

The so-called Net Neutrality regulation (regulation authority, actually; the rules had to be invoked before anyone could know what they were…) had no reason or rhyme. (Well, the Dems always want un-overseen and unaccountable bureaucracy in charge!

) Now, more sensible people control the FCC.

But, yes, I pulled the "stifled and stalled" comment "out of my ass"! (If you don't consider the extensive comments to the proposed rule-making pertinent. Which -of course, you don't!

) But, hey: you support your way of government, I support mine.

So, Sang, what went wrong with the Obama Justice Department's Americans with Disabilities Act investigation of UC Berkeley's online content?

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #119 – 2017-03-09, 06:01:05

I saw what you did there: No source, just your regular partisan bs.

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #120 – 2017-03-09, 08:32:00

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on 2017-03-09, 04:59:53

But, yes, I pulled the "stifled and stalled" comment "out of my ass"!

No Oak, it's worse. You did suck them out from some lobbyists' ass.

Don't mix up profit for a handful people at the expence of hundreds of millions, with progress, innovation or technology.

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #121 – 2017-03-09, 13:08:57

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on 2017-03-09, 04:59:53

(Well, the Dems always want un-overseen and unaccountable bureaucracy in charge! ) Now, more sensible people control the FCC.

[…]

So, Sang, what went wrong with the Obama Justice Department's Americans with Disabilities Act investigation of UC Berkeley's online content?

Wait a second… what was that you quoted earlier?

"the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990"

Ah yes, good ol' George "Dem" Bush.

But that aside. I'm sure everyone can agree that at least on the surface it seems stupid that gratis content would be forced to comply to this rule. That does not mean it's therefore rational to conclude that the regulation in and of itself is broken and shouldn't exist in the first place. It sounds more like there should be a slight tweak to allow for freely giving away which was technologically infeasible until the last decade.

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #122 – 2017-03-09, 21:49:04

Quote from: Frenzie on 2017-03-09, 05:08:57

I'm sure everyone can agree that at least on the surface it seems stupid that gratis content would be forced to comply to this rule.

Not everyone… Specifically, not the Obama Justice Department.
Regulation often leads to such circumstances.

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #123 – 2017-03-10, 09:57:29

I don't have time to research this, but here's the actual Justice Department letter: https://news.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/2016-08-30-UC-Berkeley-LOF.pdf

A quick skim does seem to suggest it's talking mainly about ensuring future videos are accessible ("Develop a system to monitor compliance", "Develop and implement procedure"), and that "UC Berkeley is not, however, required to take any action that it can demonstrate would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of its service, program or activity or in undue financial and administrative burdens."

This doesn't seem quite as unreasonable as it was made out to be, although it does seem obvious that just putting some videos out there is practically free while captioning them is not. Mainly I'm curious to see what came of following communication with the Department of Justice, because right now it's starting to sound more like a knee-jerk reaction.

Re: The government is the freaking dragon.

Reply #124 – 2017-03-11, 00:20:58

Quote

Finally, UC Berkeley has not established that making its online content accessible would result in a fundamental
alteration or undue administrative and financial burdens. As indicated below, the Department
would prefer to resolve this matter cooperatively.
(from pages 8-9…)

The letter goes on to give the university two weeks to respond and enter into a court-enforceable consent decree; or be sued by the Civil Rights devision.

I've found no consent decree…