It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Do you have proof of your claim that it stifles new competition? Because I have gigabit fiber to the house (no last mile copper) from our local county ISP, Douglas Fastnet (DFN).Horusra said:linadragon said:Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh quite false so stop spewing nonsense. All Net Neutrality requires is treating all data of a single kind the same way. This does not cost "too much up front" nor does Title II regulations. You are literally buying into shit the ISPs are saying hook line and sinker and you don't seem to grasp that the reason it is expensive has nothing to do with regulation from the federal government under title II or title I and everything to do with local permits, costs to run fiber, equipment costs etc and that's a lot of what it is. Title II won't help bring down costs, title I won't help bring down costs, a full repeal won't help bring down costs, nor will deregulation at the federal level bring down costs.Horusra said:Net Neutrality does everything to stifle new competition because the new companies can not offer what Net Neutrality requires them to offer cause it costs too much upfront.
You are in this mindset that treating video packets all the same, treating game packets all the same, treating website packets all the same and applying proper QoS is somehow costing an ISP more. They've been doing this shit forever and it's basically more costly to not follow along with "doing nothing" as you need to start developing systems to prioritize specific traffic from a specific source a certain way or not and that would actually drive up costs. There isn't "increased costs" with net neutrality or title II at all actually Title II isn't costing isps more, it isn't lowering investments, and it isn't making it harder for new isps like fixed wireless Wisps to enter the market despite what some of the larger isps and consortium of isps/industry shills will say about it.
These regulations hurt absolutely no one other than squashing a new way isps wanted to make money off webservices that they themselves are not hosting.
Like your propaganda you are spewing is truth. For a new company they have to be able to keep up the speeds to everyone. Take your crap and peddle it to the noob masses.
In another thread a long time poster here went on a long emotional diatribe how Bungie are greedy bastards for selling DLC xpacs. This same poster also went off on a vitriolic tirade about BF2 selling loot crates instead of DLC.mgilbrtsn said:This community really isn't happy unless there is a controversy. This cycle, it's loot boxes/gambling. During another cycle it was microtranactions and how they are designed to fleece the unsuspecting. During yet another cycle it was crowdfunding...and the beat goes on. All of which called for prosecutions and punishments.
The community won't be happy until they get AAA quality for free. At which point there won't be any controversies because there won't be any games.
Our solution of "not buying" is still viable. Inform people, just like food boxes, and let us make our own decisions.CrazKanuk said:Superman0X said:The person referenced in the original post (Representative Chris Lee) is not looking to define lootboxes as gambling (he knows that they are not). He isnt looking to change the laws to make this true (he realizes that it is much more complicated than just lootboxes). He is looking to regulate 'Gambling Mechanics' in relation to sales make to people under 21.
The goals are something that is achievable, and not world changing. I expect the industry to push back on this, but I also expect that a compromise can be reached.
I agree, the idea is novel and seems achievable. However, how do you implement it considering you don't have a person present on account registration. How do you enforce it? Who is responsible if they are gaming, since it's under your roof? Remember that there are plenty of slots apps out there already.
Again, I don't think it's about whether or not it CAN be done, but whether it provides enough VALUE to justify being done over some other solution.