This frames the issue perfectly. "There are not enough jails, not enough policemen, not enough courts to enforce a law not supported by the people." — Hubert H. Humphrey
Oh excuse me I forgot to mention cyber-anarchism . It is indeed a superb way of using the power of the torrent network . You just rained hell on Laceyboy and you're talking about personal attacks ? C'mon Helvetii you're dissing yourself here . I doubt they will raid your basement
Not in the U.S. and such stupid rules have a good chance of failure in the EU . Over here Obama is viewed as a mediocre to incompetent leader , so we don't really give a crap about him . The only good thing about him is that the US has a president .
Well I'm not that familiar whit E.U. electronic & digital laws but AFAIK they are geared on protecting the consumer . I really can't complain of much when it comes to digital laws . When it comes to individual nation laws then i am in complete blur , there still are countries that have dumb laws when it comes to IT . If you have some examples os such rules please post some .
I know of no law in this country or any other in the world that actually protects consumers in practice. The laws are geared at generating revenue for government, interfering with natural market forces, and destroying competition. Ultimately the end result harms the consumer.
Not really , PayPal is forced to be a actual bank in the EU . Intel got slammed hard for trying to run AMD into the ground by shady market tactics . Microsoft got slammed for acting big and Google was repeatedly slapped for privacy invasion . I quite like what our lawmakers are doing .
Interesting. I'm not familiar with the Paypal story, but Paypal is definitely a bank here in the US, regardless of whether it is classified as one or not. I'm not a fan of burdensome regulations but if you are going to make regulations, they should apply equally to all things of the type of thing meant to be regulated. I'm also not familiar with the Google story, but I would love to read up on it. Google got busted here for scraping and saving clear text passwords while they roamed neighborhoods making maps and operating a wireless sniffer to geolocate SSIDs and Mac addresses of 802.11 routers. It didn't amount to much more than a rebuke, but I look at the amount of information Google is actively collecting, and it is concerning. The Microsoft story I have heard, and I approve thoroughly. Microsoft has been repetitively charged with anti-trust activities here in the US and it never seems to turn in to anything, though their stock has gone flat over the last decade since the charges began. Anytime you control 95% of a thing(the desktop marketplace), you have a defacto monopoly which creates all kinds of opportunity for market destroying activities. Apple, who sat on the sidelines and screamed about Microsoft's activities, has also now popped up on the radar of the FTC, though I'm hard pressed to see how they control enough of anything to qualify for an anti-trust suit. Their hyper aggressive need to control absolutely everything that happens on their smart phones is causing most of those who don't belong to the religion of Apple to go buy an Android or Symbian device. I guess you pick your poison, but at least Google isn't committing the overt market control tactics Apple is at this early stage. They are probably saving them for later when they control 95% of the smart phone market and Apple is once again relegated its pathetic 5% share.
They've done it to stop telecommunication companies creating a monopoly and giving other companies the special treatment in terms of access speeds.
Selfish republicans who want their businesses to go unregulated so that they can con, cheat, deceit, rob their own customers won't understand that.
A good summary of the new law for any ISPs who have been wondering about it: http://internet-law.lawyers.com/blogs/archives/10627-The-FCCs-Net-Neutrality-Law.html
If they are conning, cheating, deceiving, and robbing, then why don't their customers sue? Unless, of course, what you said is all empty hyperbole and you are simply referring to the voluntary contracts assented to by both the ISPs and their customers.
If I downloaded a lot of things off P2P and my ISP limited access speed then I am being discriminated against. Now ofcourse I can't sue them because because all ISP's act as a cartel and only offer contracts which discriminate against me and I had no option but to sign them. ISP's who wish to offer fair services and equal treatment to all their customers are not able to do so because as a result of monopolies by cartelisation they have a cost disadvantage. Cartelisation itself invites anti-trust regulations. The best way of avoiding excessive government regulation would be to not indulge in restrictive trade practices to begin with.
No, you arent. You can always get your gay porn and Hitler films off another ISP, or a commercial grade connection(a backbone connected server Is this some fairytale world you made up? Even in your fairy tale world of gay porn and Hitler film oppression, this argument falls flat on it's face. If you want your porn so bad, you will pay a few dollars more a month to get it. You've already proven my point by paying three times what an American pays to drive a GM, because of your governments protectionist taxes. Those regulations already exist, bright spark. Collusion in price and product fixing is already against the law here (Read up on Monsanto), and is dealt with by the federal government. Liberal quote of the year. "The best way to avoid excessive government regulation is to introduce government regulation!" Yay! Are you sure you are 19? My 5 year old couldn't spit something that idiotic out with a straight face.
As long as you can't keep personal insults out of your arguments I have only one word for you: Monologue.
Insults? Is this a complaint about gay porn, meaning you dislike gays, or Hitler, who you have already gone on the record as quoting. Let me show you what an insult looks like.
Where? Please quote. When you make a thread to get back at someone targetting a whole country and make insulting accusation in every post then when your attitude is reciprocated, its not worth getting pissed and running around the forum from thread to thread carrying your grudge and contaminating every single civil discussion with your cr*p.
Helvetii, if I were to quote of every last stupid thing you've put to print, DP would have to buy more disk space, and I would have to hire a few assistants. Not only did you quote Hitler, you followed the quote with some stupid comment like, "Hitler had it right". Awww. Let me hand you a tissue. Obviously you aren't such a fan of transparency and openness when it comes to criticisms of your country's blatant and well documented racist past and present, especially in light of the fact you represent the type of bigotry most in your country are trying to get rid of. Maybe it is time you started practicing what you preach. Once again I appreciate your criticism of my tactics. Yet another sign you have no legitimate counter argument.
Now I'm going to run around the forum saying that you publicly said you raped your daughter, don't ask me to quote it. And before someone gives me an infraction for this, they need to take my post in context and infract only those who deserve it.