Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, December 11, 2017

OTP 11 December, 2017 - GOP strategist: Moore would have ‘date with a baseball bat’ if he tried dating teens where I grew up

“I grew up in Mississippi. Every father I knew, if he saw a guy like Roy Moore in his 30s trying to date his 16-year-old daughter, he would have had a date with a baseball bat,” Stevens, a former aide to Mitt Romney’s campaign, said on CNN’s “Anderson Cooper 360.”

Stevens, who worked on former Alabama Gov. Bob Riley’s (R) primary campaign against Moore in 2006, said Moore has violated the “decency standard” of civil society in his previous alleged pursuit of teenage girls.

(As always, views expressed in the article lede and comments are the views of the individual commenters and the submitter of the article and do not represent the views of Baseball Think Factory or its owner.)

Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 11, 2017 at 08:53 AM | 2653 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: bats, bats are afraid, politics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 18 of 27 pages ‹ First  < 16 17 18 19 20 >  Last ›
   1701. Sleepy's not going to blame himself Posted: December 14, 2017 at 01:29 PM (#5592666)
In any case - you can check your name here... but here's the real kicker -- search by just your LAST name.
Wow, 2316 people with my last name (not a common last name) commented on this. Almost all of them using the exact same words: "I strongly support net neutrality backed by Title 2 oversight of ISPs." or very slight variation IE "I most emphatically support net neutrality backed by Title 2 oversight of ISPs."

Wow, you can search by street address and zip code too. Some of my neighbors said rather interesting things. "Set the internet free and remove the inappropriate, unnecessary and overly vast regulations currently holding back the full potential of the internet.", indeed.
   1702. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: December 14, 2017 at 01:30 PM (#5592667)
Can agencies even consider comments from Canadians?


Probably not, but they can certainly consider comments from American citizens that are living in Canada under a TRP. You know we pay taxes, too, right?
   1703. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: December 14, 2017 at 01:31 PM (#5592668)
Graun

Profound.


Sooo.... face turn?
   1704. The Yankee Clapper Posted: December 14, 2017 at 01:32 PM (#5592670)
Just as Sessions or any of the senior GOP Senators on the Judiciary Committee (that were lawyers) were qualified to be Attorney General in a Republican Administration, it would be within the prerogative of a Democratic President to name any of the senior members on the Democratic side of the Judiciary Committee. Those are the folks who are comparable to Sessions, not the group of mostly ass-clowns you listed in #1528 that no Democratic President would even consider nominating.

So now you have to be a senior member of the Judiciary Committee to be qualified to be Attorney General? That would've been news to pretty much every president within our lifetimes, if not all of them.

Seriously, the more you try to avoid the fact that cabinet members are chosen largely for ideology, and that paper qualifications are often little more than a CYA talking point, the funnier you become.


Andy is being blatantly disingenuous here. The question is whether a liberal version of Jeff Sessions nominated by a Democratic President should be confirmed, and I readily agreed that any of the senior members on the Democratic side of the Judiciary Committee would be within the norms. Rather than compare Sessions with his actual Democratic counterparts, Andy came up with a rogues gallery of folks who no Democratic President would even consider nominating. That's beyond silly, and my pointing that out in no way suggests I want to limit the pool of future Attorney Generals to Senators on the Judiciary Committee. Andy knows this, but he's flailing.
   1705. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 01:33 PM (#5592671)

Would you consider them qualified for the position? If not, on what grounds?
Except for Sotomayor, who served as an ADA for a few years out of law school, not a single one of them has any law enforcement experience.
   1706. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 01:38 PM (#5592674)

Turning the internet into AOL is certainly going to endear the (R) brand to young people.
Except for the activists screaming "NetNeutrality" every time their cable goes out, nobody will notice anything as a result of the decision.
   1707. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 01:39 PM (#5592676)
[Double post.]
   1708. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 01:39 PM (#5592677)

In any case - you can check your name here... but here's the real kicker -- search by just your LAST name.
No results.
   1709. BrianBrianson Posted: December 14, 2017 at 01:43 PM (#5592679)
Except for the activists screaming "NetNeutrality" every time their cable goes out, nobody will notice anything as a result of the decision.


Even if it was true nothing will change (which is obviously implausible, given how much has been invested to make this happen), that every internet problem anyone has going forward is going to be blamed on (R)s is exceptionally bad optics.
   1710. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: December 14, 2017 at 01:45 PM (#5592681)
Someone's gotta make more money off this, or it wouldn't have happened. Which is kind of what Brian said. And if someone's making more money, it's coming from someone else's pockets. Or more likely several someone elses.
   1711. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 01:47 PM (#5592682)
- you might have heard about the avalanche of fake and forged comments submitted to the FCC during the comment period.


The WSJ article yesterday about this was (extensive) and pretty amusing. This isn't really news to me, perhaps the volume is, but this has gone on forever. I often skim comments on relevant SEC rules and you start to notice a pattern, form letters within a couple hundred letters. Always on both sides of the rule. Those letters hang around the public domain forever. We've gotten smart about it (our business) as we do a better job disguising our phone/names/email on the comments we submit. People extract that information and use it relentlessly, usually to cold call us. Personally, I know my name appeared on a Scott Walker recall petition (and at that point I didn't even live in WI, the signature was a clear forgery, I still have it).
   1712. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: December 14, 2017 at 01:47 PM (#5592683)
@1687 is the funniest thing you’ve posted in 20 years David.
   1713. JJ1986 Posted: December 14, 2017 at 01:47 PM (#5592684)
There is a weird fake comment in my name, but none by my father or brother (or daughter). It also has a 15-year old address.

In 2015, Chairman Tom Wheeler’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) imposed restrictive Title II, utility-style regulations under the guise of an “open internet.” Not only have these regulations inhibited innovation in the internet ecosystem, they hurt taxpayers and consumers by expanding the regulatory reach of the FCC and limiting investment in internet infrastructure. We cannot allow this revolutionary tool to be bogged down with excessive government interference. It is past time for the FCC, an agency that is funded by American taxpayers, to free the internet of burdensome regulations. By rolling back the misguided 2015 regulations we can restore an unrestricted and truly open internet. I thank the Commissioners for considering these comments during the reply period.
   1714. Master of the Horse Posted: December 14, 2017 at 01:51 PM (#5592685)
nobody will notice anything as a result of the decision.

Having been part of the rollout plans the implementation map pretty much matches with the president's supporters meaning lower density population areas with fewer providers or single sourced who can push through tiered pricing and the user has no real options. That his FCC guy got things rolling and will long term screw his supporters is something everyone laughs about. Sorry if this offends anyone.
   1715. BDC Posted: December 14, 2017 at 01:51 PM (#5592686)
As long as people can still get quickly to my 2- and 3-KB files containing book reviews, bibliographical citations, and results of dice-baseball games …

I kid, but not entirely. Like most of us here, I am old enough to have created .edu sites back when .com seemed a relative novelty. I hope the free stuff on the Web moves freely as ever. I would be mildly hopeful that it will just because (by number of bytes) there's relatively so little of it, despite its richness as information.
   1716. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: December 14, 2017 at 01:54 PM (#5592689)
Having been part of the rollout plans the implementation map pretty much matches with the president's supporters meaning lower density population areas with fewer providers or single sourced who can push through tiered pricing and the user has no real options. That his FCC guy got things rolling and will long term screw his supporters is something everyone laughs about. Sorry if this offends anyone.


Trump just lost the NEET vote, which honestly is probably about 1/2 his base at this point. They are not happy on /Pol and the Donald.
   1717. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:00 PM (#5592691)
if someone's making more money, it's coming from someone else's pockets


Economics is not always zero sum
   1718. Count Vorror Rairol Mencoon (CoB) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:05 PM (#5592694)

It’s become a grim ritual in Washington foreign-policy circles to assess the chances that the United States and North Korea stumble into war. But on Wednesday Lindsey Graham did something different: He estimated the odds that the Trump administration deliberately strikes North Korea first, to stop it from acquiring the capability to target the U.S. mainland with a long-range, nuclear-tipped missile. And the senator’s numbers were remarkably high.

“I would say there’s a three in 10 chance we use the military option,” Graham predicted in an interview. If the North Koreans conduct an additional test of a nuclear bomb—their seventh—“I would say 70 percent.”

Graham said that the issue of North Korea came up during a round of golf he played with the president on Sunday. “It comes up all the time,” he said.

“War with North Korea is an all-out war against the regime,” he said. “There is no surgical strike option. Their [nuclear-weapons] program is too redundant, it’s too hardened, and you gotta assume the worst, not the best. So if you ever use the military option, it’s not to just neutralize their nuclear facilities—you gotta be willing to take the regime completely down.”

“We’re not to the tipping point yet,” he noted, but “if they test another [nuclear] weapon, then all bets are off.”


The Atlantic

Wheeeeeeeeeeeeee!
   1719. Lassus Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:06 PM (#5592695)
Trump just lost the NEET vote,

Am I the only one who doesn't know what this is?
   1720. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:06 PM (#5592696)
By the way, I like how the media has gone from "Is believed to be Andrew McCabe" (which itself is, well, something other than journalism¹) to "is Andrew McCabe," which is just completely fabricated. To be sure, it might be true; indeed, that seems very plausible -- but the media is supposed to report things that it knows to be true, not just things that it guesses that are true.


Yes; I understand the leading theory in TDSville is that "Andy" refers to Andy Kaufman.
   1721. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:10 PM (#5592699)
I'm not flaunting anything. People, even senior FBI agents, are stupid. The older they are, the more stupid they are about technology and how recorded and permanent every utterance ever is today. (He says, on the internet, behind a laughably weak pseudonym.) Strzok obviously had this issue too, thinking (as many idiots often do) that their secret conversations were actually "secret."

This in no way whatsoever validates your paranoid conspiracy stupidity, where you're sinking to SBB levels of idiocy about The Deep Staitz coming to attack Poor, Put Upon, Dear and Glorious Leader The Donald.


It's not the deep state, but thank you for the irrelevancy. This centers on what an actual FBI agent with a prominent role in two investigations said when he thought nobody was looking, and how he behaved, and how others he implicates such as this "Andy" (if we can ever figure out who he is) behaved.
   1722. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:14 PM (#5592701)
Am I the only one who doesn't know what this is?


Not employed or in education or training. Refers mostly to younger millenial males that sit around their parents' basement shitposting Pepe memes.
   1723. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:14 PM (#5592702)

The city of Washington D.C. is implementing a regulation requiring all daycare workers to have a college degree. (They actually issued this rule a year ago, but there was so much pushback that they've reopened the comment period.) This, unlike repealing net neutrality, will actually hurt large numbers of people. Maybe people should worry about real issues instead of left-wing anti-corporate propaganda.
   1724. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:15 PM (#5592704)

Yes; I understand the leading theory in TDSville is that "Andy" refers to Andy Kaufman.
I am reliabily informed that exactly one person named "Andy" works at the FBI.
   1725. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:21 PM (#5592707)
It actually really isn't that hard at all -- he was referring to some kind of steps to mitigate the risk that Trump would get elected -- and the "precisely" there is the grammatical equivalent of straining so hard you pop a hemorrhoid.

Even if you pretend to know what the words mean -- which any non-troll would admit he doesn't -- you don't even understand the metaphor of insurance. When I take out life insurance, I am not trying to lessen the chances that I will die; I am trying to mitigate the damage to my heirs if I die. When I take out auto collision insurance, I am not trying to lessen the chances of getting into an auto accident; I am trying to mitigate damages I will suffer if I do.


Well, first, here's the text in question again:

"I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy's office that there's no way he gets elected — but I'm afraid we can't take that risk. It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40…."

I wonder if we can ever hazard a reasonable guess as to who "Andy" is.

Anyway, the "unlikely event" is that Trump gets elected. That seems pretty clear.

"Insurance" in general speaks to what happens after an unlikely event, yes. And in this case one theory is that they were trying to figure out a way to kneecap Trump in the unlikely event he *won*. And a phony Russia-collusion investigation does just that. His administration is under federal investigation and some have already been indicted/plead for things and the fervent hope among the TDS crowd is that Kushner gets indicted and/or sings on Trump who goes down for obstruction or collusion leading to impeachment. (Or for some other crime such as money laundering.)

The theory fits the facts quite well, actually.
   1726. TDF, trained monkey Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:21 PM (#5592708)
Not employed or in education or training. Refers mostly to younger millenial males that sit around their parents' basement
As long as they aren't Xers (or Yers) who sit in their parents' basement, everyone here is OK.
   1727. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:23 PM (#5592709)
The city of Washington D.C. is implementing a regulation requiring all daycare workers to have a college degree. (They actually issued this rule a year ago, but there was so much pushback that they've reopened the comment period.) This, unlike repealing net neutrality, will actually hurt large numbers of people. Maybe people should worry about real issues instead of left-wing anti-corporate propaganda.


Did you seriously just compare a municipal ordinance in DC to the Internet? Talk about scale. I googled and the ordinance has been widely panned in left wing mags like Reason and the Atlantic. Come on. Net Neutrality verse over regulation of the DC daycare market, it's like a spoon of #### verse dump truck of ####.
   1728. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:25 PM (#5592711)
Maybe people should worry about real issues instead of left-wing anti-corporate propaganda.


Anyway, this may shock you, but more people will be harmed by the loss of net neutrality than a babysitting rule in D.C. True story.\

EDITED. Misread.
   1729. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:27 PM (#5592713)
He texted his girlfriend.

No, he texted a co-worker. About government business.


That she apparently had some role in as he did.
   1730. -- Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:28 PM (#5592715)
Yes; I understand the leading theory in TDSville is that "Andy" refers to Andy Kaufman.


Lets play Twister, lets play Risk -- yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah

I wonder if we can ever hazard a reasonable guess as to who "Andy" is.


The mysteries -- they are so, so mysterious.

The theory fits the facts quite well, actually.


Unlike in a celebrity murder trial of some late renown, here the glove very much fits.

   1731. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:30 PM (#5592717)

Nobody will be harmed by the so-called loss of so-called net neutrality. Tens of thousands of people will be directly harmed, and many multiples more indirectly harmed, by the DC's childcare rule.
   1732. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:31 PM (#5592718)
Can The GOP Stop Running Toxic Candidates?

TL;DR - No.

natesilver: I’m not sure it’s just that the base has gotten more conservative, in a traditional left-right sense. It’s more that Republicans have been trained to distrust the establishment and distrust the media, and some candidates have been able to exploit that.

clare.malone: Well, GOP voters certainly identify as more conservative:


Click through for a chart, which shows conservatives have dramatically and increasingly self identified as more and more conservative over the last few decades. I imagine itis all the liberals fault though.
   1733. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:31 PM (#5592719)
So now you have to be a senior member of the Judiciary Committee to be qualified to be Attorney General? That would've been news to pretty much every president within our lifetimes, if not all of them.

Seriously, the more you try to avoid the fact that cabinet members are chosen largely for ideology, and that paper qualifications are often little more than a CYA talking point, the funnier you become.


Andy is being blatantly disingenuous here. The question is whether a liberal version of Jeff Sessions nominated by a Democratic President should be confirmed, and I readily agreed that any of the senior members on the Democratic side of the Judiciary Committee would be within the norms. Rather than compare Sessions with his actual Democratic counterparts, Andy came up with a rogues gallery of folks who no Democratic President would even consider nominating. That's beyond silly, and my pointing that out in no way suggests I want to limit the pool of future Attorney Generals to Senators on the Judiciary Committee.


Well, thanks for at least putting that last point in writing, although in that case I have no idea why you'd mention Sessions' membership on the Judiciary Committee to begin with, if you're saying that such a prior position isn't necessary for the AG job.

------------------------------------------------------------------

Question for David: In #1528 I made a list of hypothetical nominees for Attorney-General. Here they are again:

1. William Kunstler
2. Morris Dees
3. Bruce Wright
4. Joseph Forer
5. Ron Kuby
6. Leonard Weinglass
7. Sonia Sotomayor
8. Catharine MacKinnon

Would you consider them qualified for the position? If not, on what grounds?


Except for Sotomayor, who served as an ADA for a few years out of law school, not a single one of them has any law enforcement experience.


So then you would have voted for Sotomayor? Is that a reasonable inference?

As for the others: It's true that none of them have (or had) any law enforcement experience as prosecutors, but it does seem rather strange that considering your many jeremiads against the oppressive power of the state, you'd find several well known defense attorneys, and one judge with a reputation for holding police accountable, to fall short of your idea of qualified.

Somehow that doesn't compute, unless there's some other explanation that I'm sure you'll be able to provide.



   1734. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:33 PM (#5592720)
Nobody will be harmed by the so-called loss of so-called net neutrality.


Spending more and getting less for it is being harmed. Which is pretty much exactly the same result in the D.C case, people will end up spending more and getting less. But in one case we are talking a few thousand people and in the other millions.
   1735. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:33 PM (#5592721)
if Meuller were texting his wife in this way I think you'd agree that would be a problem. It goes beyond merely thinking it or pillow talk.

Sorry, but I'm really unclear how it goes beyond pillow talk. (Unless, of course, you're interpreting that phrase hyperliterally, but since you just chastised people here the other day for thinking that when you said "all" you meant "all," I dismiss that possibility.) Of course, there are other aspects of impropriety -- he was apparently using an FBI phone rather than his personal one, and also it was an extramarital affair -- but those don't speak to the partisan political issues we're discussing; those aspects would be wrong regardless of whether they were discussing the election or the World Cup.


The person he was texting apparently had a role in the investigation.

Secondly, while it may be moving the goalposts as to the "in private" issue it's still relevant to the overall issue: there's the "insurance policy" text.

There are also some 9,625 other texts we haven't seen.

No objective person would claim that there's nothing worth seeing or pursuing here. Is that really your position? I initially signed on to the "shrug, everyone is partisan" thing too -- and I think that's a generally valid point, but now we've learned more facts that take this well beyond that.
   1736. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:35 PM (#5592724)
[1718] I don't take Lindsey Graham's comments seriously (or literally or whatever). It's just like when Donald Trump said he'd completely destroy North Korea. It's all just posturing to try to look tough.
   1737. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:37 PM (#5592725)
Spending more and getting less for it is being harmed. Which is pretty much exactly the same result in the D.C case, people will end up spending more and getting less. But in one case we are talking a few thousand people and in the other millions.
In one case we're talking about tens of thousands of people, and in the other millions of unicorns and yeti and intelligent Trump supporters and other similar mythological creatures.

So-called net neutrality has nothing to do with how much consumers are going to spend.
   1738. zenbitz Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:38 PM (#5592728)
Why would you assume that treating a stripper like a stripper is bad treatment?


Touche'. What did you mean by "treat them like a stripper"?
   1739. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:38 PM (#5592729)
Rubio Threatens to Vote Against Tax Bill

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) informed Senate leaders he intends to vote against the Republicans’ $1.5 trillion tax plan unless it includes a larger expansion of a child tax credit, according to a Senate GOP source


I suspect Marco realizes he is in a swing state and he needs something to show most voters. For a little while anyway.

Republicans consider giving working families the shaft, yet again, in tax bill negotiations

Congressional Republicans are looking at shortening the duration of tax cuts that their plan would give to families and individuals, a leading lawmaker said Thursday.

That change would free up more revenue for additional changes to their tax overhaul, but it could also heighten complaints that the bill prioritizes cuts for corporations over households.

Under a tax overhaul bill passed by the Senate earlier this month, tax cuts for all American households would expire at the end of 2025. But Republicans are now considering having those tax cuts expire in 2024.


Health Care Companies Are Huge Winners From Tax Bill

The list is dominated by health care companies, which might explain why they’ve been so quiet about Republican efforts to destroy Obamacare. The Obamacare stuff is a pain, but the losses due to Republican meddling and sabotage probably pale compared to the gains from the tax bill. I wonder how much of this tradeoff was made explicit in back rooms and private telephone calls?
   1740. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:39 PM (#5592730)
   1741. Count Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:40 PM (#5592731)
"Insurance" in general speaks to what happens after an unlikely event, yes. And in this case one theory is that they were trying to figure out a way to kneecap Trump in the unlikely event he *won*. And a phony Russia-collusion investigation does just that. His administration is under federal investigation and some have already been indicted/plead for things and the fervent hope among the TDS crowd is that Kushner gets indicted and/or sings on Trump who goes down for obstruction or collusion leading to impeachment. (Or for some other crime such as money laundering.)


What's phony about the investigation under this theory? The whole thing is made up and it's just unlucky that the Trump people kept lying about their actual contacts with Russians?
   1742. BDC Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:40 PM (#5592732)
As I said, I'll try to remain hopeful about net neutrality. For me the downside would be a loss of free flow of information and ideas. I personally don't give much of a hoot over whether Netflix beats Hulu, though I suppose in their own way they circulate ideas too. Maybe it will all come to nothing. But to opine that a major change in an enormous industry can't have any bad consequences may be a bit defiant of Murphy's Law.

As to the DC daycare thing, it is symptomatic of "credential creep" that helps keep working-class people poor. It's hardly just Bad Government that goes in for it – in fact, it's only Bad Government that people have any chance at pushing back against. When corporations and private institutions continually require people to retrain just to stay in place, it's usually chalked up to the pursuit of excellence or something. And of course the intent may be "excellence," but the impact is to keep people in debt and insecure about their livelihoods.
   1743. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:40 PM (#5592733)
So-called net neutrality has nothing to do with how much consumers are going to spend.


Sure it doesn't. All those corporations are lined up around the block clamoring for it because they all value innovation and really want to lower their prices and make less money, but Net Neutrality won't let them.
   1744. BDC Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:42 PM (#5592735)
For a little while anyway

Yeah, Rubio is another of these "I was against it before I was for it" Republicans. Voters have selective memories, and as you say, it's a swing state: some purplish folks may remember his bold temporary stand instead of his final opposite vote.
   1745. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:43 PM (#5592736)
As to the DC daycare thing, it is symptomatic of "credential creep" that helps keep working-class people poor. It's hardly just Bad Government that goes in for it – in fact, it's only Bad Government that people have any chance at pushing back against. When corporations and private institutions continually require people to retrain just to stay in place, it's usually chalked up to the pursuit of excellence or something. And of course the intent may be "excellence," but the impact is to keep people in debt and insecure about their livelihoods.


To be clear this is exactly the sort of bad regulation we were talking about yesterday, while NN is the sort of good regulation I approve of. Business likes barriers to entry and so loves bad regulation and hates a fair and level playing field and so hates good regulations (like regarding pollution for example).

If the GOP occasionally, on accident even, dismantled a couple bad regulations in their quest to pay fealty to their business masters I would be more kindly disposed towards them.
   1746. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:44 PM (#5592737)
.
   1747. BrianBrianson Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:44 PM (#5592738)
I suspect it's far more about monopolizing where we spend money on the internet more than trying to shake more money out of us, though the former may inexorably lead to the latter over time.
   1748. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:46 PM (#5592739)
"Insurance" in general speaks to what happens after an unlikely event, yes. And in this case one theory is that they were trying to figure out a way to kneecap Trump in the unlikely event he *won*. And a phony Russia-collusion investigation does just that. His administration is under federal investigation and some have already been indicted/plead for things and the fervent hope among the TDS crowd is that Kushner gets indicted and/or sings on Trump who goes down for obstruction or collusion leading to impeachment. (Or for some other crime such as money laundering.)

What's phony about the investigation under this theory?


That the thing they used as a pretext to investigate doesn't exist.

This is the equivalent of pulling a black person over for a "broken tail light" that wasn't broken and then arresting the person for "resisting arrest" or finding some unrelated crime to pursue.

The whole thing is made up and it's just unlucky that the Trump people kept lying about their actual contacts with Russians?


Innocent people can incriminate themselves, and often do. One of Roger Clemens and Brian McNamee can tell you that.

Or people who did something wrong but not the thing they're looking for -- such as Flynn lying about something that wasn't a crime and wasn't collusion.
   1749. The Good Face Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:48 PM (#5592740)
Touche'. What did you mean by "treat them like a stripper"?


Are strippers not treated differently than non-strippers? And is that treatment not the entire point of being a stripper?

   1750. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:49 PM (#5592742)
There are also some 9,625 other texts we haven't seen.
I find that number astonishing. (Not accusing you of making it up; just making an observation.). How long was this going on? If it was for a year, that's an average of 27 texts a day, every day. I mean, my wife and I are so lazy that we text each other when she's in the living room and I'm in the kitchen, and we don't come close to that kind of number. Not even if you count nonsubstantive ones like "Ok" or "Thx" or ":)" in response to something the other one has said.

No objective person would claim that there's nothing worth seeing or pursuing here. Is that really your position?
My position is that you can investigate all you want -- indeed, someone independent should read all 10,000 of those things -- but there's no basis at this time for "OMG Conspiracy Deep State TDS Coup!!!!" let alone, "Shut Down Mueller Immediately!" (A particularly nonsensical reaction given that this all came to light because Mueller dropped Strzok from the investigation.)
   1751. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:49 PM (#5592743)
Except for the activists screaming "NetNeutrality" every time their cable goes out, nobody will notice anything as a result of the decision.

Even if it was true nothing will change (which is obviously implausible, given how much has been invested to make this happen), that every internet problem anyone has going forward is going to be blamed on (R)s is exceptionally bad optics.


Well, the key is "notice" - of course.... I mean - out-and-out blocking was always the highly unlikely worst case.

The problem - and the Pandora's box that Net Neutrality shut, but the repeal now re-opens - is you're likely going to see price hikes from content providers that you'll never actually know came from a provider passing its lane access costs onto the consumer.... nor would you necessarily see any snuffed-in-the-crib competitors that fail to incubate because the freeway slowly turns into a toll road.

...and that's beyond potentially nefarious problems that fall short of pure blocking - why absolutely block anything if you can achieve the same practical effect by just surreptitiously and selectively throttle it into insignificance?

It's not that no one will notice, they'll just have no idea why... it's not like most people are running parallel connections through two different ISPs and will be able to spot that the nascent Comcast Sucks Streaming News doesn't actually have a shitty host or is exceeding its bandwith.... They'll just try the Comcast Is Awesome News stream instead.
   1752. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:51 PM (#5592744)
Net neutrality might be even more of a nothingburger than Russia collusion.

Really now, the unicorns people get obsessed with...
   1753. Hysterical & Useless Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:51 PM (#5592746)
When corporations and private institutions continually require people to retrain just to stay in place,


Or make you write up a detailed job description every time they do a "corporate restructuring" (which in my experience was about once every 18 months) or bring in a new department head, and then make you interview for the chance of retaining your job.
   1754. BDC Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:52 PM (#5592747)
And of course the big uncertain consequence of net non-neutrality isn't little bibliography .edu sites or mother's-basement bloggers:

Thursday's FCC vote to end net neutrality will kill many of the things you enjoy most about the internet in its current form, but chief among them is your ability to access copious amounts of free adult entertainment.

At the moment, porn makes up a massive portion of our online consumption. Last year Pornhub viewers alone used 3,110 petabytes of bandwidth. And people are paying almost nothing for it.

But now that internet service providers will have the option to control what we can access, they'll be able to stop the free flow of what we all want most. Platforms like Pornhub and YouPorn have been vocal in the fight against net neutrality, and the loss of it will likely reshape the entire industry.
   1755. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:53 PM (#5592748)
The problem - and the Pandora's box that Net Neutrality shut, but the repeal now re-opens - is you're likely going to see price hikes from content providers that you'll never actually know came from a provider passing its lane access costs onto the consumer....
I repeat: if there are extra monopoly rents out there waiting to be extracted from consumers, then why don't ISPs just do that now?
   1756. BrianBrianson Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:54 PM (#5592750)
I repeat: if there are monopoly rents out there waiting to be extracted from consumers, then why don't ISPs just do that now?


Net Neutrality prevents them from establishing such monopolies.
   1757. Count Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:58 PM (#5592752)
That the thing they used as a pretext to investigate doesn't exist.

This is the equivalent of pulling a black person over for a "broken tail light" that wasn't broken and then arresting the person for "resisting arrest" or finding some unrelated crime to pursue.


Are you talking about investigating the Trump campaign or just investigating Russian interference in our election? I assume you agree that the latter happened and was bad and we should try to avoid it happening again and it is worth investigating exactly what happened.

We have plenty of evidence now that would warrant investigation into the Trump campaign (the conversations about sanctions, various third parties communicating with Wikileaks, the DJTJR emails and meeting, etc.).
   1758. The Good Face Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:58 PM (#5592755)
But now that internet service providers will have the option to control what we can access, they'll be able to stop the free flow of what we all want most. Platforms like Pornhub and YouPorn have been vocal in the fight against net neutrality, and the loss of it will likely reshape the entire industry.


Time to reinvest those Bitcoins into ribald etchings of women in petticoats.
   1759. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 02:59 PM (#5592756)
My position is that you can investigate all you want -- indeed, someone independent should read all 10,000 of those things -- but there's no basis at this time for "OMG Conspiracy Deep State TDS Coup!!!!" let alone, "Shut Down Mueller Immediately!" (A particularly nonsensical reaction given that this all came to light because Mueller dropped Strzok from the investigation.)


Oh, I don't want Mueller shut down at this point. Far from it. I want him to investigate the whole thing -- and to investigate Hillary's campaign as well.

You might stop trying to find the Real Andy long enough to notice that Trump really has nothing to lose here. TDSville already takes it as a given that he colluded with the Russians. So either that's confirmed, in which case what the TDSers already believed has simply been confirmed, or it's NOT confirmed, in which case the people seeing collusion around every corner have egg on their faces that will never wash off. Moreover from what we know thus far there's a greater chance that Hillary's campaign did something wrong and something worse than what Trump's campaign did. There's a very real chance that the bogus dossier caused Hillary's political opponent to be investigated and wiretapped. I am indeed very much interested in seeing these matters pursued and gotten to the bottom of.

   1760. Hot Wheeling American, MS-13 Enthusiast Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:01 PM (#5592758)
Not even if you count nonsubstantive ones like "Ok" or "Thx" or ":)" in response to something the other one has said.

The world wants needs to know - has DMN ever sent a smiley emoticon to anyone?
   1761. -- Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:03 PM (#5592760)
but there's no basis at this time for "OMG Conspiracy Deep State TDS Coup!!!!" l


Yeah, there is -- the "risk mitigation" text.

At least.
   1762. Hot Wheeling American, MS-13 Enthusiast Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:03 PM (#5592761)
Trump really has nothing to lose here

Right, which is why he fired Comey for looking into this.
   1763. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:04 PM (#5592763)
I repeat: if there are extra monopoly rents out there waiting to be extracted from consumers, then why don't ISPs just do that now?


Give it time.

I mean, despite the fact that ISPs are generally shitbags, I don't think they're stupid.

Only the stupid guts open the golden goose because he thinks he can instantly gain access to the infinite golden eggs hidden inside. Instead, you monitor the goose... study how and how often it lays the golden eggs. Then you cage it. Feed it the optimal diet. Figure out whether it's more profitable to have it lay bigger eggs less often, or smaller eggs more often. Experiment - carefully - with whether attaching a suction pump to its egg shooter yields more eggs... or punching it... or whatever.
   1764. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:04 PM (#5592764)
You might stop trying to find the Real Andy long enough to notice that Trump really has nothing to lose here.


Heh. Sure. Do you really believe this? If so go find a serious person and have a good long talk with them.
   1765. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:05 PM (#5592765)
This is the equivalent of pulling a black person over for a "broken tail light" that wasn't broken and then arresting the person for "resisting arrest" or finding some unrelated crime to pursue.
Let's leave out the needlessly provocative "black"...

Let's say an Amber Alert goes out for all Forest Green Subaru Imprezas. A cop pulls one over, and it then turns out they're driving without a valid license. Then it turns out that person has had multiple DUIs, and there's a warrant out for his arrest. Are you going to let it slide because the guy didn't have anything to do with the Amber Alert?

   1766. -- Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:05 PM (#5592766)
We have plenty of evidence now that would warrant investigation into the Trump campaign (the conversations about sanctions, various third parties communicating with Wikileaks, the DJTJR emails and meeting, etc.).


Actually, you're comically exaggerating all of that, but in any event an investigation has to have a valid basis at the time it was started. Finding out later that Paul Manafort didn't fill out a few lobbying forms can't justify the inception of an investigation -- particularly in the middle of a presidential campaign.
   1767. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:06 PM (#5592768)

I repeat: if there are monopoly rents out there waiting to be extracted from consumers, then why don't ISPs just do that now?

Net Neutrality prevents them from establishing such monopolies.
Huh? What? Huh? No. That doesn't even make sense. Net neutrality has nothing to do with antitrust law and doesn't prevent anyone from forming monopolies. The theory behind "net neutrality" is that lots of people only have access to one broadband provider, so that if said broadband provider either blocks its customers' access to particular websites or raises the prices for doing so, those customers will have no recourse because they don't have any other choices of broadband provider. But if customers are willing to pay more, broadband providers that don't face competition can just raise their prices now. Net neutrality doesn't restrict retail pricing.
   1768. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:07 PM (#5592771)

You might stop trying to find the Real Andy long enough to notice that Trump really has nothing to lose here. TDSville already takes it as a given that he colluded with the Russians. So either that's confirmed, in which case what the TDSers already believed has simply been confirmed,
...and Trump is impeached. You sort of forgot about that step. So, yeah, he does have something to lose.
   1769. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:09 PM (#5592772)

The world wants needs to know - has DMN ever sent a smiley emoticon to anyone?
Hire a special prosecutor and find out.
   1770. DavidFoss Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:09 PM (#5592773)
I mean, despite the fact that ISPs are generally shitbags, I don't think they're stupid.

In a lot of places, internet is bundled with your cable TV and land-line telephone service. Both of the latter two are famous with having bills that creep up by a buck or two almost every month. Is that what we're talking about here?
   1771. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:12 PM (#5592777)

Let's say an Amber Alert goes out for all Forest Green Subaru Imprezas. A cop pulls one over, and it then turns out they're driving without a valid license. Then it turns out that person has had multiple DUIs, and there's a warrant out for his arrest. Are you going to let it slide because the guy didn't have anything to do with the Amber Alert?
FTR, the existence of an Amber Alert is not generally sufficient grounds to pull over a car.
   1772. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:12 PM (#5592778)
1757

We have plenty of evidence now that would warrant investigation into the Trump campaign (the conversations about sanctions, various third parties communicating with Wikileaks, the DJTJR emails and meeting, etc.).


Not true! Whatever evidence is out there is obviously FAKE NEWS!!!!11!!!111one

DJT, DJTJR, Sarah H. Sanders, Bear, TGF, YClapper and Ray all say so!
   1773. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:14 PM (#5592779)
Huh? What? Huh? No. That doesn't even make sense. Net neutrality has nothing to do with antitrust law and doesn't prevent anyone from forming monopolies. The theory behind "net neutrality" is that lots of people only have access to one broadband provider, so that if said broadband provider either blocks its customers' access to particular websites or raises the prices for doing so, those customers will have no recourse because they don't have any other choices of broadband provider. But if customers are willing to pay more, broadband providers that don't face competition can just raise their prices now. Net neutrality doesn't restrict retail pricing.


Huh? What? Huh? No. That doesn't even make sense. Net neutrality has nothing to do with antitrust law and doesn't prevent anyone from forming monopolies. The theory behind "net neutrality" is that lots of people only have access to one broadband provider, so that if said broadband provider either blocks its customers' access to particular websites or raises the prices for doing so or shakes down the content provider or throttles the bejeesus out of a provider that runs afoul of it, those customers and content providers will have no recourse because they don't have any other choices of broadband provider or reach potential customers. But if customers are willing to pay more, or forced to pay - one way or another - for specific content broadband providers that don't face competition can just raise their prices now and/or eliminate slowly or through access attrition content they don't like. Net neutrality doesn't restrict retail pricing; it simply changes allows the equation to change such that ISPs have de facto control over who/how/how effectively formerly pulled information freely available can be allowed to those with access.

FTFY.

   1774. Count Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:15 PM (#5592780)
If you don't care if the Trump campaign worked with the Russian government to undermine our election (which included illegal hacking by the Russian government) or wanted to reward them for doing the same once in power and would be happy if they do it again then why not just say that? The GOP was closer and closer to stating that position openly over the summer but the guilty pleas and indictments seemed to have scared them off. The drawback with the "FBI relied on fake collusion evidence to undermine Trump!" and "Hillary is the one who colluded!" stuff is that you might accidentally admit that collusion is bad.
   1775. BrianBrianson Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:17 PM (#5592781)
It doesn't prevent service providing monopolies, but it prevents service providers from become content monopolizers. Today, I can set up a website anyone can visit, tomorrow, I gotta pay Verizon $10 million or their customers connect a 1 kb/day, and new content providers can't enter the market in practice, and you can throttle away the existing ones. And everyone acts like AOL - they're your only content provider, so they get all the money you spend on content. And of course, once competitors can't enter the market, they can start raising rates as well.

Even if you live somewhere where there are two or three service providers, they'd all be morons not to operate this way - businesses are not so dumb to realize that it's better to milk their market share, rather than cut prices, having competitors cut prices, and everyone gets less milk from their market share. When entry into the market is easy and cheap, competition can be too numerous, and someone may go for unorthodox strategies. But for utilities with huge market entry costs, that doesn't happen.
   1776. BrianBrianson Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:18 PM (#5592782)
And of course, turn it around - if Net Neutrality isn't doing much, why are verizon et al. hiring armies of Russians to spam the FCC into revoking it?
   1777. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:20 PM (#5592783)

I gotta pay Verizon $10 million or their customers connect a 1 kb/day,
You can't pay $10 million more unless you can get it from your customers. And if you can get it from your customers, then so can Verizon, by bumping up its prices for service.

Even if you live somewhere where there are two or three service providers, they'd all be morons not to operate this way - businesses are not so dumb to realize that it's better to milk their market share, rather than cut prices, having competitors cut prices, and everyone gets less milk from their market share.
The latter is kind of how competition actually works.
   1778. Lassus Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:23 PM (#5592784)
This is an odd discussion in a lot of ways, because either the crappy internet access results that people say will happen WON'T happen, in which case David will be right, or the crappy internet access results that people say will happen WILL happen, and David will be thrilled, because that's what David wants to happen a la Free Market uber alles. There's quite literally no way David will be unhappy with ANY result.
   1779. BrianBrianson Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:28 PM (#5592788)
Realistically, of course, the charges against Manafort validate an investigation (without really addressing whether a special prosecutor was needed). Manafort's presence/actions were part of the smoke, and did indeed turn out to reflect fire. Maybe not quite the fire people were expecting, but (ignoring partisanship and wanted outcomes), that's why you hold an investigation.

I mean - I remain pretty confident someone else, whose (big fish) X (seriousness of crimes) exceeds Flynn's, remains to be charged. Otherwise, the state's witnesses make little sense. But we already know some of the smoke reflected fire. And, if it does catch (D)s cooperating with Russia - sure, fine, whatever - though Ray saying he considers seriously likely is bizarre.
   1780. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:30 PM (#5592790)
But now that internet service providers will have the option to control what we can access, they'll be able to stop the free flow of what we all want most. Platforms like Pornhub and YouPorn have been vocal in the fight against net neutrality, and the loss of it will likely reshape the entire industry.

Time to reinvest those Bitcoins into ribald etchings of women in petticoats.

Okay, for that we've just called off your fatwa. For now, anyway.
   1781. BrianBrianson Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:30 PM (#5592791)
You can't pay $10 million more unless you can get it from your customers. And if you can get it from your customers, then so can Verizon, by bumping up its prices for service.


Yes, exactly, so now I can't open my business, and Verizon's content department doesn't need to worry about competitors. So they get all the content money, that previously would've been spread across many content creating businesses.

The latter is kind of how competition actually works.


Yeah, which is why businesses where the cost of entry into the market is prohibitive don't really compete. If they do, they all lose. It's a prisoner's dilemma, in a universe where everyone knows of the prisoner's dilemma.
   1782. DavidFoss Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:32 PM (#5592792)
The drawback with the "FBI relied on fake collusion evidence to undermine Trump!" and "Hillary is the one who colluded!" stuff is that you might accidentally admit that collusion is bad.

How does the late October Comey letter fit into the whole FBI undermining Trump narrative? And the known stuff that Flynn did didn't even happen until the transition.

You'd think if you wanted to hurt Trump, you'd publicly open an investigation on guys like Manafort, Gates & Page during the actual campaign when it might have swayed voters. Instead, its all Clinton stuff coming from the FBI in both July and October. This idea that they were going to wait until Trump won to try to hurt him doesn't make sense.
   1783. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:33 PM (#5592793)
1779

And, if it does catch (D)s cooperating with Russia - sure, fine, whatever - though Ray saying he considers seriously likely is bizarre.


Of course it's seriously likely, because FUSIONGPS! FUSIONGPS! FUSIONGPS!
   1784. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:40 PM (#5592796)
I mean, despite the fact that ISPs are generally shitbags, I don't think they're stupid.


In a lot of places, internet is bundled with your cable TV and land-line telephone service. Both of the latter two are famous with having bills that creep up by a buck or two almost every month. Is that what we're talking about here?


Not exactly - at least, that's not my long-term issue with net neutrality. I think ISPs are shitbags mainy because - in the US - they scrimp on infrastructure and provide crap access (relative to the rest of the world) because they're more concerned about monopolizing market share than focusing on their last mile role. I think they're likewise horrifically dishonest about what they sell you - i.e., the whole 'peak speed' and hidden/fine print caps.

But neither of those are directly functions of net neutrality.

It's no accident that cable companies rapidly took over the ISP space -- because again, I don't think they're stupid. They could see the writing on the wall. You want cable, you're ultimately provided with only those channels that a cable provider makes available to you. Channels have to be assigned and there is a practical limit - startup costs - to creating a channel that's eventually going to be accessed through a cable provider anyway.

The internet doesn't work that way because the startup costs for a provider of some kind of content are so minimal, but also because the spectrum is virtually limitless. You don't have to get a 'channel' - just a domain (or I suppose, technically, not even that... really - just a host with an address on the broader internet WAN).

Killing net neutrality basically allows the cable companies-now-ISPs to get to work applying their tried and true business model to a technology that is only constrained by that model. Sans Net Neutrality -- ISPs can now, in clever ways, in hidden ways, in highly visible ways, in every way in between -- apply that model whereby they get to squeeze/charge BOTH the consumer AND the provider.... to say nothing of the fact they can potentially go even further.... like suddenly making the CNN picture fuzzy when CNN airs that story they don't like.
   1785. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:43 PM (#5592798)
And in this case one theory is that they were trying to figure out a way to kneecap Trump in the unlikely event he *won*.


Only idiots believe that theory. The context of the texts was the FBI assuming Trump couldn't win, thus only acting in a manner that could harm CLINTON and ignoring the wrongdoings of Team Cockholster. The "insurance policy" in question was NOT IGNORING TRUMP'S WRONGDOINGS ENTIRELY. Just in case he won.

You know Ray, you are probably smarter than SBB. You should attempt to behave like it.
   1786. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:45 PM (#5592799)
1784

to say nothing of the fact they can potentially go even further.... like suddenly making the CNN picture fuzzy when CNN airs that story they don't like.


Well, A T & T is gonna own CNN soon, anyway, soooo...
   1787. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:46 PM (#5592801)
FTR, the existence of an Amber Alert is not generally sufficient grounds to pull over a car.
Thanks, Mr. Pedant. :) I was trying to come up with some completely innocent reason, just for the sake of argument. Fine, substitute a burned-out headlight.

The *point* is, you've got the guy with a legit arrest warrant sitting there; do you let him go because the reason for him being there was unrelated to the warrant?
   1788. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:47 PM (#5592803)
How does the late October Comey letter fit into the whole FBI undermining Trump narrative?


Well, that seems to have been the contexts of THE TEXTS OH MY GOD THE TEXTS!!! Someone seems to have suggested in a meeting "in Andy's office" that Comey and the FBI should only concern itself with Clinton, and thus err on the side of torpedoing her campaign, because seriously, there's no chance Donald Trump is going to win. And Strzok seems to have floated the idea that the FBI should have an "insurance policy" of actually paying attention to both campaigns, you know, just in case Trump was doing something bad and ACTUALLY WON.
   1789. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:49 PM (#5592804)
   1790. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:49 PM (#5592805)
Well, A T & T is gonna own CNN soon, anyway, soooo...


Netflix, Amazon, and Google (excuse me Alphabet) can all see money rushing away from them towards the parasites like Comcast.
   1791. BrianBrianson Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:49 PM (#5592806)
Or, as an example, these guys who used the wrong lane to cross the border

A search revealed a quarter pound of cocaine. Should they have let it slide?
   1792. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 14, 2017 at 03:56 PM (#5592811)
A search revealed a quarter pound of cocaine. Should they have let it slide?


Just like Benghazi! turned up nothing so they should have let the Clinton email server slide, and White Water turned up nothing so they should have let Bill's affairs slide.
   1793. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: December 14, 2017 at 04:00 PM (#5592812)
1784

to say nothing of the fact they can potentially go even further.... like suddenly making the CNN picture fuzzy when CNN airs that story they don't like.



Well, A T & T is gonna own CNN soon, anyway, soooo...


Which in a really awful and horrifying way -- is somewhat illustrative of the whole problem and shows the very real danger of how rapidly people may come to rue today.

Obviously, nothing in net neutrality prevents an ISP from also being a content provider - many were before, and they're only rapidly becoming moreso. Comcast obviously owns plenty of assets that exist on the other side of that "last mile". So does Time/Warner-soon-to-be-AT&T.

Near-term - they're probably unlikely to go to war with each other on NN terms.... there's plenty for both to gobble up and restrict in the meantime.

The dystopian worst case is that you get "it" all - your internet service AND your entertainment AND your news AND your information all in a perfectly closed circuit, all under one neat little umbrella of properties and subsidiaries and divisions.
   1794. spycake Posted: December 14, 2017 at 04:06 PM (#5592815)
Or, as an example, these guys who used the wrong lane to cross the border


The catcher's throwing lane?
   1795. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: December 14, 2017 at 04:06 PM (#5592816)
Netflix, Amazon, and Google (excuse me Alphabet) can all see money rushing away from them towards the parasites like Comcast.


FTR - it comforts me not in the least that Google and Amazon (toss FB and Apple in, too, if you like) are basically the big, lumbering behemoths across the other side of the last mile that certainly have the resources to stand toe-to-toe with AT&T, Comcast, etc.

The only reason I line up with them is that at least they're on the other side of that great digital pond and it's still ultimately in my control whether I pull them - or someone else.
   1796. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 14, 2017 at 04:06 PM (#5592817)
The dystopian worst case is that you get "it" all - your internet service AND your entertainment AND your news AND your information all in a perfectly closed circuit, all under one neat little umbrella of properties and subsidiaries and divisions.


With a complementary pair of Mouse Ears!
   1797. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 14, 2017 at 04:08 PM (#5592819)
The only reason I line up with them is that at least they're on the other side of that great digital pond and it's still ultimately in my control whether I pull them - or someone else.


There are big, but they also have done big things, innovated and provided value. Comcast has ... a monopoly in many markets which gave it tons of cash to buy stuff.
   1798. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 14, 2017 at 04:08 PM (#5592820)
Thanks, Mr. Pedant. :) I was trying to come up with some completely innocent reason, just for the sake of argument. Fine, substitute a burned-out headlight.

The *point* is, you've got the guy with a legit arrest warrant sitting there; do you let him go because the reason for him being there was unrelated to the warrant?
I know what your point was, and yes of course I was being a pedant. But also FTR, the Supreme Court has expressly ruled that the answer to your question is no, they don't have to let him go.
   1799. BrianBrianson Posted: December 14, 2017 at 04:12 PM (#5592822)
Under Net Neutrality, being a content providing behemoth didn't provide a ton of leverage. Microsoft dominated email addresses with Hotmail - they were a behemoth, everyone and their mother was using Hotmail. Then GMail was just better, and people abandoned Hotmail in droves. The cost of entering the market as a content provider is very low, so being a behemoth doesn't help that much. Plenty of Google actions have failed (like, Groups, say) because behemoth power on content is pretty low.
   1800. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: December 14, 2017 at 04:16 PM (#5592823)
You know, people. IT providers have real, hard assets in the world. Assets that would burn if you took initiative.
Page 18 of 27 pages ‹ First  < 16 17 18 19 20 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Downtown Bookie
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 2018 October 15: The shift in focus from sport to politics
(1440 - 1:47am, Oct 21)
Last: TVerik, who wonders what the hell is "Ansky"

NewsblogOT - NBA Thread (2018-19 season kickoff edition)
(795 - 1:22am, Oct 21)
Last: maccoach57

NewsblogMLB must fix glaring problem that ruined an all-time classic
(87 - 1:16am, Oct 21)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogLEAGUE CHAMPION SERIES OMNICHATTER! for the 2018 Playoffs!
(2612 - 1:16am, Oct 21)
Last: puck

NewsblogOT - October 2018 College Football thread
(156 - 11:42pm, Oct 20)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogWhy The Dodgers' WS Odds are So High
(27 - 11:28pm, Oct 20)
Last: Baldrick

NewsblogCatch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (October 2018)
(544 - 10:57pm, Oct 20)
Last: Lassus

NewsblogThe Brewers are becoming more and more positionless on defense | SI.com
(22 - 8:50pm, Oct 20)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogBest 2018-19 Hot Stove value may be in trade
(2 - 6:44pm, Oct 20)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogAstros' Jose Altuve underwent surgery to repair right knee injury
(1 - 6:01pm, Oct 20)
Last: Count Vorror Rairol Mencoon (CoB)

NewsblogWhat It Took to Write About Baseball as a Woman
(25 - 5:36pm, Oct 20)
Last: jingoist

Sox TherapyAmerican League Champions!!!!
(32 - 5:17pm, Oct 20)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread (2018-19 season begins!)
(997 - 2:06pm, Oct 20)
Last: Jose is an Absurd Force of Nature

Hall of Merit2019 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(173 - 1:33pm, Oct 20)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

NewsblogBrewers win NLCS Game 6 vs. Dodgers
(2 - 12:21pm, Oct 20)
Last: perros

Page rendered in 0.7562 seconds
46 querie(s) executed