Nolder

Members
  • Content count

    21742
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Nolder

  • Birthday 07/04/1990

Contact Methods

  • Skype
    nolderrivlen@hotmail.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    California
  • Interests
    SFF, Video Games, CCGs, Movies, TV, Politics, Technology, Nature

Recent Profile Visitors

14222 profile views
  1. Big Tech Monopolies

    I very briefly looked at the link so maybe I was wrong but it looked like it was violations of the Net Neutrality regulations. He was trying to justify NN by showing me that it had been violated which doesn't make sense to me. It's like if you suddenly made a law outlawing chocolate ice cream and that said look at all these people in violation of eating chocolate ice cream. Oh TV. I kind of forgot about TV since I haven't actually had TV service for several years. Yeah ok that's valid I guess.
  2. Big Tech Monopolies

    I don't really understand how one can be pro or anti regulation tbh. It seems to me regulation should be a case by case thing not a principled stance thing.
  3. Big Tech Monopolies

    Really? Because I don't remember ISPs charging different amounts for content from Youtube 10 years ago BEFORE Net Neutrality was even a thing. So how can it be that when it's repealed something completely different is going to happen? Thankfully I live in an area where this isn't a thing. We have two companies competing in the area not just one monopoly that says take it or leave it. And don't get me wrong I know these companies are big and that it's a problem. I just think that's a separate problem to be dealt with in a different way. I don't get what you're saying here. Take Verizon for example, they do internet and phones, why would they slow down my internet if I'm watching Netflix? Netflix isn't in the ISP business. I agree completely. It's been a problem in the country for a long time and it needs solving. I don't think telling companies how to provide their service is the right approach though EVEN IF it worked. As in even if Net Neutrality is everything you think it is and I'm wrong about everything concerning it. Couldn't they already do that prior to NN? That's what I'm not understanding. Like there was Before NN, NN, and After NN and you are telling me that what occurs during these time periods are all different things but wouldn't Before NN and After NN be the same thing? Monopolies they already had. We agreed on that point. And NN doesn't make them less of a monopoly it just tells them how to act. It doesn't introduce competition. Doesn't sound that way to me. Even if that's true so has every other FCC chair and Fed chair and many other positions for decades if not longer. I'm not saying that's right but I still don't see why you single Pai out for some special hatred. At worst he's just another corporate toadie giving his buddies kickbacks from a seat of power. He's no more notable or worse than anyone else who's done it. So it's like how banks give out loans. How did they shut it down? Glancing at the Wikipedia page it looks like they're still going and the corporate restructuring to Alphabet may have effected them somewhat. Yeah, maybe. There could be another solution. Like I said I don't even know how I feel about the idea of a fast lane. It seems like it could work but it also seems like it could be abused and I'm not sure if that is worth it. Isn't the fast lane thing based on content though? Yeah if you're starting a video streaming service to compete with Youtube that might be true (and with what you've already sold me against the idea) but it wouldn't be true for any other type of website or service. ?????? The Machinima company? Red vs Blue? THOSE GUYS? If you're talking about the same people I'm thinking of I find it very had to believe they're competing with Netflix and HBO. Mmm. Yeah kind of. But like it's an overwhelming topic which will dominate the thread. By all means go for it if you want. It's more relevant than NN atm. Yeah I've been hooked on it for few months now. Trying to get the new frame but no luck so far.
  4. Citites

    The British people are very distinct genetically. While they have changed throughout history (all people have) there has been very little change in...I think the last 30,000 IIRC. So it's not a matter of being "white plus something else" it's a matter of being British and having had your ancestors live on that island for thousands of years. A Brit is different from a Swede. Ok? Yes, essentially. Disagreed. Tell that to Yelp.
  5. Citites

    Those reasons are multifaceted though. Economics comes into play for example. I'm not scared wages will decrease I just don't want that to happen. I can agree with that. At least at one time they were not really American cities. Well let me ask you something first, do you agree with Lenlo that you can't speak about a culture unless you've been to it's origin first hand? If you do then there's really no point in continuing the conversation like I told Lenlo. And in that he's a fool." Hmm,. you are calling a man who believes that some immigration to Britain is bad because the people involved have no wish or interest in assimilating into British culture. A man that has been called a Xenophobe and racist for those views. However, a man who is both British and has lived their and is intimately aware of the extent that other immigrant groups have actually assimilated. As against judging his views against yours any objective observer would conclude that you are the fool. Wait a couple hundred years and then see what they say. Not sure many of the colonists even understood those principals. Do you think a farmer in Virginia really had that great of a grasp on The Constitution and the principals behind it? And if they didn't you think that farmer was not really American? Being American is not a belief in a set of ideas as so many falsely believe and promote. I refer to these people as Paper-Americans. And before you all go hurr durr that's racist my best friends sister married a white guy from South Africa and he's no more American than the illegal Mexican family that lives across the street from me. Disagreed. There's room for some exceptions. I am sure there were some Germans, some Irish, maybe even an Italian or two around at the time who knows. But by and large the Americans of America 1.0 (I think we're in America 3.0 depending on how you want to count it) were the British Colonists and their direct decedents.
  6. Citites

    That doesn't even make sense. I'm saying not all white people can be British. I guess that's...I don't know...Ethnicism? lol Oh ok, well I guess that's where our conversation ends because I think the opposite and there's really no getting past that. Anything I say is in your eyes discredited due to this fact. I think there are many other ways to learn and experience culture (music, literature, etc) besides walking in the streets and I think I have a well enough understanding of British culture to speak on it but whatever.
  7. Citites

    @Lenlo
  8. Citites

    It's a policy decision, I'm not shaking like a leaf worried terrorists are going to blow me up dude. Not just white. A swede is not authentically British for example despite being white as snow. I'm sorry but they aren't and the truth is many of them don't even want to be. They have their own identity and that's fine but it's not British. And in that he's a fool. America is an interesting and unique case which I think differs from any other place on the planet in all honesty. As I've said before I think the most "authentic" Americans are decedents of British Colonists.
  9. Citites

    You might mistake certain areas for Mexico in a few of them but overall yes they are. I would say Las Vegas is International too. I never said they were interchangeable. Is this a common word or an archaic one? I had to look this up and I can't tell if you're just throwing a ten dollar word at me to sound smart or if it's genuinely a word I've never heard of before that is actually in use. Not to brag about my vocabulary (lol what) but that doesn't happen to me very often. Yeah, I can see that. It seems to me that throughout history there have generally been roughly two or three camps of people that have very different views of how things should be.
  10. Citites

    No? You didn't answer my question by the way.
  11. Trump FP

    ??????
  12. Trump FP

    Looks to me like the neocons don't want to take any responsibility for the wars in the middle east which is why Bolton made the announcement.
  13. A Song Of Wolves and Villagers

    Sure. I like Apple juice. Thanks.
  14. Big Tech Monopolies

    I'm out for now. I want to play warframe and you and I will be here all day if we continue.
  15. Big Tech Monopolies

    Maybe it should be? The more you use the more you pay, just like utilities. Ok but individual customers aren't actually individuals. Correct me if I'm wrong because I fully admit there are aspects of this I kind of guess my way through but when an internet company like Verizon comes into your neighborhood they lay down physical cables which make their network available to you should you decide to sign up with them. Now if say 5 households in the neighborhood sign up each house is guaranteed a certain up and down speed based on whatever package they bought...but they are all sharing that physical cable laid down by the company and while it is robust enough to service a LOT of bandwidth there IS a limit to how much it can handle. So if I am say illegally downloading movies using a torrent service and I'm downloading gigs and gigs all at once it takes up a lot bandwidth. Will my neighbors notice? Odds are they wont because the odds of everyone being on the network at the same time and the network actually being overburdened is probably low, at least where I live. But in say an apartment building where there are a lot of people living in one space and a lot of internet usage going on, yeah I would suppose it could happen. And that's kind of the point. With people watching so much Youtube and Netflix it slows down the internet for everyone else, at least potentially. I think this is where the idea for "fast lanes" come in and I'm not entirely sure how I feel about that solution. Anyway point being we share the internet and the internet is a limited resource. How so? Disagree Name one. I think there are a number of people just leaving and doing other things with their time to be honest with you. No. Harm may not be the technically correct word in this situation but I can't think of another at the moment. /shrug You seem to be making an argument that the new law is better because it was broken, I don't see how that follows. Of that I have no doubt. I think it's a separate issue though. Yes. We agree. They are grouped together because someone thought that when people browse a topic related to Twitter they might also possibly want to know what Facebook is. This is because they are both social media but they fill different niches. In other words someone browsing a page for Jack Daniel's Whiskey might also be shown a link to Budweiser beer because they are both alcohol products but generally speaking people treat beer and whiskey very differently. At least, I've never seen anyone chug whiskey but I guess I have seen people sip beer so maybe I spoke too soon. anyway I hope that you will finally now understand that they can be DIFFERENT and not compete DIRECTLY while still falling under the same category. Lines? ???? It is. I wasn't suggesting it wasn't. I was just linking an article related to breaking up these tech monopolies. It wasn't directly related to what we were talking about. Sorry if that wasn't clear. That's a whole other can of worms.