Pick Your Poisson

[nicole]

Oh the clusterfuck is going to last longer than a week friends.

[Jadagul]

But I won't have to work for any of it.

[Kolohe]

Has it always been knee-JAIR, or is every newscaster going out of their way to not dare risk a hard g sound?

[nicole]

I've heard it different ways, but never with a hard g.

[Fin Fang Foom]

Always. It was a French colony. I think I've called it NYE-jer though.

[Kolohe]

I've heard it different ways, but never with a hard g.

Well, pronouncing it with a hard g is...a different word.

[Mo]

Two items:

Is it just me or does every conservative magazine style guide have, "If you criticize Republicans or their voters, you need a 2-4 paragraph preamble about how liberals are the worst"?

While looking for the ALCS, I saw that my TV has Newsmax TV and WAR has a show on it.

[Eric the .5b]

Is it just me or does every conservative magazine style guide have, "If you criticize Republicans or their voters, you need a 2-4 paragraph preamble about how liberals are the worst"?

It's standard when the wagons are circled. And, I swear, the wagons have been permanently circled and replaced with concrete walls since 2002 or so.

[Mo]

Is it just me or does every conservative magazine style guide have, "If you criticize Republicans or their voters, you need a 2-4 paragraph preamble about how liberals are the worst"?

It's standard when the wagons are circled. And, I swear, the wagons have been permanently circled and replaced with concrete walls since 2002 or so.

Like the Williamson article criticizing Ice-T and Ice Cube. Does he not realize that Ice Cube has been making family movies/TV shows for 2 decades and in the 90s was in Higher Learning* and Three Kings, not exactly gansta movies.

* Another movie that shows that nothing today is new (down to the National Anthem issue)

[thoreau]

We'll know that American politics are back to normal when people are again blaming libertarians for everything, instead of Facebook ads.

[JasonL]

But they were SERVED to 245 MILLION PEOPLE (ergo hillary).

[Ellie]

Thinking about renting out our townhouse for Super Bowl weekend. It's not incredibly convenient to get to the stadium from us, but it's doable. We could easily crash with my parents for the weekend. I might wait until it gets a little closer (I'd have to clean the place to take pictures anyway) and then see what other similar houses are renting for to decide if it's worth it.

[Ellie]

[Aresen]

Thinking about renting out our townhouse for Super Bowl weekend. It's not incredibly convenient to get to the stadium from us, but it's doable. We could easily crash with my parents for the weekend. I might wait until it gets a little closer (I'd have to clean the place to take pictures anyway) and then see what other similar houses are renting for to decide if it's worth it.

Biggest concern: Superbowl attendees might not be 'quiet guests, respectful of your neighbors and careful with your property.'

From your POV, are you close enough to the stadium or other goings-on that the mobs of people are going to make your life a hassle where you live? In that case, it might be worth being away from home.

[Aresen]

Ditto.

Other than "It is an evul plot to turn the internetz over to Comcast" or "Abolishing it is an evul plot to turn the internetz over to Comcast."

[Highway]

Warren Meyer at Coyoteblog has talked about Net Neutrality before (from 2014), from the perspective of analyzing the traffic. A huge amount of internet traffic is video. 50% of downstream traffic at the time of his first post was Netflix and Youtube. He makes the point that those companies love what people have called Net Neutrality because, basically, it has to carry all of that traffic. When people complain, they complain to the ISPs. The ISPs have to build new networks, or otherwise improve capacity, but the content providers don't have to play any part in paying for that. The cost is entirely passed on to the ISPs users, whether they use those services or not.

Now, there is a point to be made about ISPs potentially restricting access to sites they don't like. And also about the monopolistic situation of broadband providers. But that's another motte and bailey argument against restricting any content, which primarily benefits high-bandwidth content creators.

[Dangerman]

But what if Comcast throttles me? I need my 4K/60 YouTube videos of fidget spinner unboxings to get to sleep at night!

[Fin Fang Foom]

The thing that's bad about throttling services is that they can charge the users of those services for the needed increased capacity, they don't have to charge Netflix.

[Dangerman]

Ok, so who should pay and how do we meter the costs? Right now the piper calls the tune and companies extract money for services at bottlenecks, just like any other industry. If they can't get paid to transfer ownership because DRM can't keep up, they will charge for what they *can* control, which is allocation of resources that are scarce, right? This resource right now is Mb/S, not content. Sure, you can get ripped versions of Netflix Originals, but not on-demand in 4K without buffering.

[Mo]

Warren Meyer at Coyoteblog has talked about Net Neutrality before (from 2014), from the perspective of analyzing the traffic. A huge amount of internet traffic is video. 50% of downstream traffic at the time of his first post was Netflix and Youtube. He makes the point that those companies love what people have called Net Neutrality because, basically, it has to carry all of that traffic. When people complain, they complain to the ISPs. The ISPs have to build new networks, or otherwise improve capacity, but the content providers don't have to play any part in paying for that. The cost is entirely passed on to the ISPs users, whether they use those services or not.

Now, there is a point to be made about ISPs potentially restricting access to sites they don't like. And also about the monopolistic situation of broadband providers. But that's another motte and bailey argument against restricting any content, which primarily benefits high-bandwidth content creators.

This is dumb because it misses that Netflix and Youtube do pay. They pay their bandwidth providers. ISPs could very simply manage this by charging their consumers for usage, the way wireless ISPs do. Not that metered wireless usage doesn't end up having AT&T/Verizon complaining about Netflix ruining customer experience. The problem with metering is that customers get really mad about it. ISPs want to offer a service that their customers want (unlimited bandwidth), then get mad when people actually use the service they are supposedly offering. So basically, fuck the ISP complaints about users using what they are sold.

[thoreau]

Just meter everyone for whatever amount of bandwidth they use. Totally neutral. No free rides.

[JasonL]

I don’t understand why it’s a regulatory thing in any event. I don’t get why google can have an algorithm, Facebook can have one, but there is only one right way to manage network traffic.

[Jennifer]

I don’t understand why it’s a regulatory thing in any event. I don’t get why google can have an algorithm, Facebook can have one, but there is only one right way to manage network traffic.

I think the "regulatory" aspect comes from the fact that with ISPs, if you're not happy with the service you're getting, you do not have the option of taking your business elsewhere because it's a local monopoly.

[JasonL]

Euros use that logic to drag google into court- good idea?

[Mo]

I don’t understand why it’s a regulatory thing in any event. I don’t get why google can have an algorithm, Facebook can have one, but there is only one right way to manage network traffic.

Google's algorithm gets regulated when they do anti-competitive things.