Last Active
Favorite Role
  • FCC killed net neutrality. What does it mean for gamers?

    Hulluck said:
    Albatroes said:
    Hulluck said:
    Meh, Reddit got people riled up. Competition will keep balance for the most part in the U.S. people seem to ignore that. Example: In the past few years it's gone from Google going on about bringing their 1000Mbps lines to major cities then now various companies offering those lines. I don't live in some major city. There's 2 companies atm in my neighborhood that offer 1000Mbps lines. The kicker is At&t (wow) is the cheapest at ($80) beating the other company by $10. I don't really have a need for a line like that personally. I'm happy at 250Mbps up and down at $45 total, fees included. While a lot of rural area's may not see fiber for awhile it's definitely spreading. Heck my tablet and phone can't even take advantage of a 250 line. Usually topping out at around 100Mbps. S6 edge and some random tablet. Could be my router which is not the best but not junk either. Point being companies will have to be competitive to keep customers. If companies start doing stuff that people don't like they'll switch companies. If they all start doing it upsetting enough people I'm sure at that point something will be done. All the end of days stuff is way over the top.
    Sounds like a response from one of the millions of fake accounts the news has been reporting that were submitted to the FCC because this decision had to be made public and accept open feedback before it was concluded.
      Really? That's a first. Slightly hilarious you just called me a fake account or even a FCC bot?  I can't actually believe it. lmao! How did the internet ever survive or innovate prior to 2015. Rolls eyes.

    Added: The doomsdayers atm are way over the top. Competition does work where you have plenty of choices! And if not which is a big if people will be all over ISP's who mess up. Then I'll worry about it. As of right now. Life goes on.
    I don't know if this is the case here but large companies do hire agencies to employ people to post in forums to help influence public opinion.  Very easy to find those companies on the internet looking to hire people to post in forums.
    An account with over 800 posts on a wide variety of topics is vanishingly unlikely to be a paid shill for a company trying to influence public perceptions.  This isn't a situation of not knowing if it's the case here.  It's a situation of knowing full well that it's definitely not the case and launching personal attacks anyway.
  • FCC killed net neutrality. What does it mean for gamers?

    k61977 said:
    There are really only a handful of providers most of the country already.  Comcast and Timewarner pretty much have 2/3 of the country on lockdown.  They bought up most of the competition let them keep there name but all the money goes to them.  Just try going into an area that either of those as the major provider for landline internet and get someone else if you don't live in a major city.  So yeah there is already a huge monopoly in this country for this service.
    I'd submit that one of the most important considerations in any proposed regulations is what will it do to competition.  If you've got multiple good ISP options where you live, then your ability to switch to a competitor will do more to push them to offer you better service than any regulations ever could.

    Let's also not forget that lighter regulations doesn't mean no regulations.  Ajit Pai has said that the main thrust will be informing customers of what you're doing.  It will remain very illegal for an ISP to throttle sites or block sites while claiming that they aren't.  On another net neutrality thread, someone linked to a list of bad things that various ISPs did that they were fined or otherwise sanctioned for and forced to stop before the Title II regulations were implemented in the first place.
  • FCC killed net neutrality. What does it mean for gamers?

    Considering that this only reverts to the rules as they were in early 2015, freaking out only makes sense if you thought the Internet was some dystopian wasteland in 2014 and has gotten massively better since then.

    Either the sky will fall or else it won't.  Most likely, returning to the light-touch regulatory regime that facilitated the rise of the Internet over the course of nearly 20 years preceding the FCC's arbitrary switch to Title II regulations in 2015 will similarly help facilitate future Internet improvements that we don't foresee today.

    But it's also possible that ISPs will commonly roll out abusive and predatory business practices and block legitimate sites that they don't like or some such.  If that happens, then the view that heavier regulation of the Internet is necessary will become prevalent all across the political spectrum rather than the Internet being just another domain in with the left wants more regulation and the right wants fewer.  In that case, heavier regulations will come, hopefully in the form of Congress passing a bill properly authorizing heavier regulations.

    And don't think that Congress is incapable of acting when there's overwhelming public support for an issue.  It's hard to pass laws when half of the public is in favor and half against, and that's by design, but it's much easier to pass laws when there is broad popular support and few people opposed.  For example, consider the CAN-SPAM act of 2003, which passed the Senate unanimously and the House by a vote of 392-5.
    TheDarkrayneEponyxDamorSirAgravaineErgoProxyDecayDaranarlaxieGorweScotbartoni33Bellomoand 4 others.
  • SC makes PC Gamers worst micro transactions list

    The thread title is wrong.  There is nothing "micro" about many of those transactions.  "Buy this for $100" is not a "micro" transaction.
  • Is EA going downhill since Battlefront 2???

    I wouldn't say that EA is going downhill.  I would say that they went downhill some decades ago and stayed there for a long time.  The whole Battlefront fiasco is par for the course from EA, no worse than many others that they've had in the past, and probably no worse than many others that they'll have in the future.