Yes, as you say, stop glorifying these kinds of people in the news.
But how about also stop glorifying these kinds of people IN THE MOVIES. Don't make hundreds of movies about the kind of twisted sick people you don't want in real life.
The government has demonstrated beyond all doubt that it is neither willing nor able to keep its workers from violating the Constitution systematically and premeditatedly.
The government has demonstrated beyond all doubt that it is working hard to ensure its workers can violate the Constitution systematically and premeditatedly. And with impunity.
Which harms America more? Which of the following things have larger negative effects on ordinary Americans' every day lives? * encryption * bank safes * the war on (some) drugs * militarized police * police brutality * concentrated control and ownership of major news media * corrupt politicians and corrupt government * corporate lobbying (eg bribery) * the great economic divide * Windows 10
I think the Bush brothers learned the 'evildoers' phrase early in life when the freshly made cookies and the cookie jar were to be off limits unless permission had been given to have a cookie.
Re: Is $750K a relevant chuck of change for a fine like this?
It might be depending on how many people paid $80 / day for WiFi.
If you had ten-thousand purchasers, for one day, you would have $800,000. That's still $50K profit.
Now if you had very much less than ten thousand purchaser-days worth, then the fine starts to be significant, as it is pure loss, beyond any minor costs of providing the 'service' of highway robbery WiFi.
Re: One could make the same argument about telephone calls.
Yeah, that is actually a good argument.
At least nationwide. The reality is that the cost to Mariott for nationwide calling is free to cheap. They should not be charging an arm and a leg to allow you to make this call.
It is a perfect demonstration that this 'service' is crooked. Sort of like if they offered a 'service' of kicking you in the nads.
> the FCC injecting itself into these negotiations is going to piss off free marketeers
Hey idiots, if there really were a free market over what is being negotiated, the FCC wouldn't need to be inserting itself.
Lifting the rules that prohibit bringing in a different station's network affiliate channel would actually be useful towards creating a free market for cable systems carrying network tv affiliates.
I would also point out that markets end up getting regulations imposed for a reason -- because the very complainers created the conditions that made it necessary.
I was talking about hotels. I think my argument was clear. If they offer free indoor plumbing, they should offer free WiFi. Both are essential for today's traveler, whether for business or personal use.
As for other businesses like an ice cream shop, or coffee shop, free WiFi makes sense for the same reasons. It's like they have other things for free, WiFi is just a minor cost of doing business and making your business more attractive than your competitor.
Back to hotels, it is laughable now, but remember when motels used to have big signs out front screaming: * Color TV! * Air Conditioned!
That seems laughable now. But WiFi is the same way. It has passed from an optional extra to a basic necessity. The cost of operating WiFi should just be built in to the cost of the room. If Motel 6 can do it, then the Hilton can surely afford to do it.
I know that Censorship is so easy to confuse with Copyright because they are so similar and have such similar origins and purposes.
If it was digital millennium copyright act, then the person wielding the DMCA would need to be the copyright owner of the material they seek to have censored.
It's amazing how these organizations consider themselves to be exclusively entitled to OUR spectrum, which is a LIMITED and NATURAL resource.
Because spectrum is limited, our democratically elected government (such as it is) manages this resource for us, just as it does for other limited natural resources like clean water and clean air.
Where does a hotel come off thinking it has an exclusive entitlement to use OUR spectrum and kick us off? Especially when they are breaking the laws of the land by doing this, and we are within the laws of the land by using our own mobile devices for WiFi. (And using our devices and spectrum that we legally PAID for!)
If they want to complain about so many WiFi hotspots, then it is their own fault. Point their finger at themselves. If they had free WiFi, nobody would be using their own mobile hotspots, and they wouldn't have a spectrum management or congestion problem in the local area. If they were GENUINELY concerned about insecurity of some mobile hotspots, then again, this is their own fault -- offer free WiFi and the problem goes away.
One other thing: we need to get this terminology 'Rogue Access Point' or 'Rogue Hot Spot' out of the vocabulary. It is these jamers that are Rogue, and the people using them are the criminals violating the laws of the land. The people whose mobile hotspots they are jamming are not the crooks or rogues. They are the ones operating WITHIN the laws of the land, using what they paid for.
And 'crooks' is the right word to call them for another reason: $80 / day for WiFi.
Hotels offer the following things for FREE: * air conditioning * heating * indoor plumbing * electrical outlets * drinking fountains * in room TV with at least a few channels
ALL of the above items: * cost a great deal to initially build * have an ongoing cost to operate
Yet the hotels don't have outrages charges for these other things? Having an $80 / day charge, or even a $5 / day charge for WiFi would be like: * $50 / day for indoor plumbing * $20 / day for TV * $40 / day for electrical outlets * $60 / day for air conditioning * etc
So why don't hotels have free WiFi?
It is also amusing that inexpensive motels have free WiFi but outrageously prices highway robbery hotels charge high prices for WiFi?
If we're going to have a Piracy warning at the start of movies, how about requiring a Hollywood Accounting at the start of movies so that audiences can know that little to none of the vast amounts of money they are paying are going to some of the people who deserve a bigger cut of it.
On the post: TSA At The Movies: Theater Chain Looks To Bring Security Theater To The Movie Theater
Re: Want to ACTUALLY deter these shooting?
Yes, as you say, stop glorifying these kinds of people in the news.
But how about also stop glorifying these kinds of people IN THE MOVIES. Don't make hundreds of movies about the kind of twisted sick people you don't want in real life.
On the post: TSA At The Movies: Theater Chain Looks To Bring Security Theater To The Movie Theater
Re: Re: Not looking for weapons...
Yes. Really.
On the post: Court Lets Malibu Media Move Forward With Discovery In Copyright Case, But Blocks 'Speculative Invoicing'
Re:
On the post: Jeb Bush Claims That Creating Encryption Harms America
Re: "evildoers"?
The figures can be drawn to make the evildoers obvious and easy to distinguish from the good guys*.
* the rich, white, fat, old, crooked, hetrosexual males who run things
On the post: Jeb Bush Claims That Creating Encryption Harms America
Re: Wrong of course
On the post: Jeb Bush Claims That Creating Encryption Harms America
Which harms America more?
* encryption
* bank safes
* the war on (some) drugs
* militarized police
* police brutality
* concentrated control and ownership of major news media
* corrupt politicians and corrupt government
* corporate lobbying (eg bribery)
* the great economic divide
* Windows 10
On the post: Jeb Bush Claims That Creating Encryption Harms America
Re:
On the post: Remember How The DMCA 'Stopped' The Release Of Ashley Madison Cheaters Data? About That...
Re:
On the post: FCC Fines Company Caught Blocking Wi-Fi To Force Visitors On To Their Own, Absurdly-Priced Services
Re: Is $750K a relevant chuck of change for a fine like this?
If you had ten-thousand purchasers, for one day, you would have $800,000. That's still $50K profit.
Now if you had very much less than ten thousand purchaser-days worth, then the fine starts to be significant, as it is pure loss, beyond any minor costs of providing the 'service' of highway robbery WiFi.
On the post: FCC Fines Company Caught Blocking Wi-Fi To Force Visitors On To Their Own, Absurdly-Priced Services
Re: One could make the same argument about telephone calls.
At least nationwide. The reality is that the cost to Mariott for nationwide calling is free to cheap. They should not be charging an arm and a leg to allow you to make this call.
It is a perfect demonstration that this 'service' is crooked. Sort of like if they offered a 'service' of kicking you in the nads.
On the post: FCC May Finally Act To Ease The Pain Of Stupid Cable TV Content Negotiation Blackouts
Free Market
Hey idiots, if there really were a free market over what is being negotiated, the FCC wouldn't need to be inserting itself.
Lifting the rules that prohibit bringing in a different station's network affiliate channel would actually be useful towards creating a free market for cable systems carrying network tv affiliates.
I would also point out that markets end up getting regulations imposed for a reason -- because the very complainers created the conditions that made it necessary.
On the post: FCC Fines Company Caught Blocking Wi-Fi To Force Visitors On To Their Own, Absurdly-Priced Services
Re:
On the post: FCC Fines Company Caught Blocking Wi-Fi To Force Visitors On To Their Own, Absurdly-Priced Services
Re: Re: Why WiFi should be free
I was talking about hotels. I think my argument was clear. If they offer free indoor plumbing, they should offer free WiFi. Both are essential for today's traveler, whether for business or personal use.
As for other businesses like an ice cream shop, or coffee shop, free WiFi makes sense for the same reasons. It's like they have other things for free, WiFi is just a minor cost of doing business and making your business more attractive than your competitor.
Back to hotels, it is laughable now, but remember when motels used to have big signs out front screaming:
* Color TV!
* Air Conditioned!
That seems laughable now. But WiFi is the same way. It has passed from an optional extra to a basic necessity. The cost of operating WiFi should just be built in to the cost of the room. If Motel 6 can do it, then the Hilton can surely afford to do it.
On the post: Remember How The DMCA 'Stopped' The Release Of Ashley Madison Cheaters Data? About That...
Misinterpreting the DMCA again
I know that Censorship is so easy to confuse with Copyright because they are so similar and have such similar origins and purposes.
If it was digital millennium copyright act, then the person wielding the DMCA would need to be the copyright owner of the material they seek to have censored.
On the post: FCC Fines Company Caught Blocking Wi-Fi To Force Visitors On To Their Own, Absurdly-Priced Services
Entitlement to a limited natural resource
Because spectrum is limited, our democratically elected government (such as it is) manages this resource for us, just as it does for other limited natural resources like clean water and clean air.
Where does a hotel come off thinking it has an exclusive entitlement to use OUR spectrum and kick us off? Especially when they are breaking the laws of the land by doing this, and we are within the laws of the land by using our own mobile devices for WiFi. (And using our devices and spectrum that we legally PAID for!)
If they want to complain about so many WiFi hotspots, then it is their own fault. Point their finger at themselves. If they had free WiFi, nobody would be using their own mobile hotspots, and they wouldn't have a spectrum management or congestion problem in the local area. If they were GENUINELY concerned about insecurity of some mobile hotspots, then again, this is their own fault -- offer free WiFi and the problem goes away.
One other thing: we need to get this terminology 'Rogue Access Point' or 'Rogue Hot Spot' out of the vocabulary. It is these jamers that are Rogue, and the people using them are the criminals violating the laws of the land. The people whose mobile hotspots they are jamming are not the crooks or rogues. They are the ones operating WITHIN the laws of the land, using what they paid for.
And 'crooks' is the right word to call them for another reason: $80 / day for WiFi.
I'll shut up now.
On the post: FCC Fines Company Caught Blocking Wi-Fi To Force Visitors On To Their Own, Absurdly-Priced Services
Why WiFi should be free
* air conditioning
* heating
* indoor plumbing
* electrical outlets
* drinking fountains
* in room TV with at least a few channels
ALL of the above items:
* cost a great deal to initially build
* have an ongoing cost to operate
Yet the hotels don't have outrages charges for these other things? Having an $80 / day charge, or even a $5 / day charge for WiFi would be like:
* $50 / day for indoor plumbing
* $20 / day for TV
* $40 / day for electrical outlets
* $60 / day for air conditioning
* etc
So why don't hotels have free WiFi?
It is also amusing that inexpensive motels have free WiFi but outrageously prices highway robbery hotels charge high prices for WiFi?
On the post: Yes, The Appeals Court Got Basically Everything Wrong In Deciding API's Are Covered By Copyright
What makes Software so special?
On the post: Why Patent Trolls Love East Texas... And Why Congress Needs To Fix It
Venue Reform is a good idea
On the post: Why Patent Trolls Love East Texas... And Why Congress Needs To Fix It
Patent Plaintiffs
On the post: Hollywood Keeps Breaking Box Office Records... While Still Insisting That The Internet Is Killing Movies
Re: Warning before movies
Next >>