Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
I believe applies the other way around. You can grant someone immunity, such as escaped slaves post slavery, but not make something illegal and arrest people after the law is passed for crimes committed before.
Comcast seems to be sponsoring today's comment section.
Well if that's how they want to spend their money . . .
If only Comcast had been as vigilant with respect to the law and its legal rights at the time of its, er, law-breaking. They musta switched lawyers.
Was wondering if you (or anyone) could clear something up, as I was not able to read the article as closely as I'd like: were the ads submitted to Comcast Cable Companies (to be aired in local markets) or a channel(s) owned by Comcast?
Yes, here's where Salon gets a little gamey. I just saw a video of Wyclef Jean on the home page with a very, very long Pfizer ad preceeding it.
We don't have 'circuits' anymore, like a T1/E1 line dedicated setup circuit. We have an approximate bandwidth. Now within some general guidelines you SHOULD be getting what you pay for. I have a 7M down, 400K up which is pretty consistent w/in 5%. I did find that TW did a 'quiet push' and my 7 year old cable SB4100 modem couldn't handle it. So I swapped out the cable modem for a new SB5101, for free and instantly doubled my throughput.
The real issue is not so much bandwidth which is usually adequate - it's latency created by apps that don't play well. Torrents are notorious for hogging up inbound queues in the DSLAM. When you have 20-30 inbound streams to feed a torrent that's what stacks every other app in the wait queue. Pile on enough of them and the DSLAM discards them. This is what causes VoIP chop like you're talking into a fan. It's also what causes 'large' apps to queue up and wait. A 'large' app would be a webpage with multiple simultaneous embedded flash apps. Another problematic app is 'Fasterfox' which attempts to deep prefetch. This can wreak havoc by creating too many fetch commands that pull up too many streams.
...if Comcast were participating in a free market for broadcast and cable services.
They aren't.
They're just a bunch of rentseeking commie douchebags, who spend their time lobbying local communities for exclusive service provider contracts. Anyone who believes in capitalism should have contempt for a bunch of parasites like Comcast.
Luckily, the fact that they have chosen to be parasites creates a way to strike back against them: organize a campaign to contest the renewal of all of Comcast's cable licensing agreements at the local level. They often have had to license these things from individual counties and towns. I'm sure you could do serious damage to their renewal case in areas that are particularly anti-Bush. Comcast is the provider in most of Vermont, for example, and I'll bet Vermont is just full of people who would love to screw Comcast if something like this was made generally known.
Granted and noted; (albeit I take issue with your slavery analogy). However, post hoc legalization of a behavior that was criminal at the time it was committed infringes upon the rights of those citizens who were, at the time the criminal act was committed, protected by those valid criminal statutes. Q.E.D.
If you try to buy and view a movie over the Internet (instead of buying a movie via Comcast's own pay-per-view service), then Comcast may throttle you:
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/060408-comcast-traffic-management.html
New Comcast traffic management targets users, not protocols
ISP to slow traffic for individual customers who consume "disproportionate" amount of bandwidth
By Brad Reed , Network World , 06/04/2008Comcast announced this week that it will [...] slow Web traffic for individual users who consume a "disproportionate" amount of bandwidth.
[...]
A recent study by the Max Planck Institute for Software Systems showed that P2P traffic throttling was prevalent among cable company ISPs such as Comcast and Cox, and that all of the study's U.S.-based hosts that found their P2P traffic blocked were located on cable networks.
- - Network World, Wednesday, June 4, 2008
In other words, some ISPs (Internet Service Providers) have discovered a technical necessity to throttle video traffic.
And all of the ISPs who have discovered such a technical necessity just happen to be in the business of selling video content.
The corporate control of our government is complete. No Republican OR Democrat can or will stand up to Big Media. If they do then they will not get their ads run. So just relax and enjoy the Facism. Obama can't end it. God can't end it. Congress is impotent. Just sit back and watch the end of the American experiment. Should be a good show.
I must have missed the evidence of Comcast illegally wiretapping anyone. Can someone provide any docs to support that claim?
The ads are directed at Carney, who does support telecom immunity. Comcast refuses to air them and is offering patently absurd reasons not to do so. That's the thrust here.
Its a good bet, given Comcast's behavior and close association with the current Administration? Doesn't that tell you something?
Aside from that, I think references to gulags, mass murder, and political assassinations should have been included along with the Communist Chinese and Soviets line. Yep, that would have made a very tasty ad indeed. Heh.
And given the Bush Administration's behavior, that's factually incorrect how?
I love this part....
Good, 'cause nobody here loves you.
Damn that rule of law. How dare Comcast refuse to air an ad attacking it. Why...they should be made to lay down and punch themselves in the face if Glenn demands it.
Yes, damn them. Damn them for putting themselves in this position in the first place. Damn them for showing contempt for the rule of law. And damn the rest of us for demanding they be held to account.
You ass.
Luckily they aren't really controlling debate, they are declining to air an attack ad. A really clumsy one at that.
Refusing to air a factually correct and professionally-made ad about an officeholder within a market it has a virutal lock on isn't "controlling the debate"?
Clearly you prefer the marketplace of ideas be limited to those with the biggest checquebook.
Keep up the good work.
We shall. And what precisely have you done to make the world a cleaner place lately?
Here's a thought: turn yourself into mulch and go fertilize something. Gods know you're full of enough shite to qualify.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
Salon headlines in your mailbox
