Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror

Comment Re:It is about profiting from cord cutters (Score 1) 264

by arekin (#50878753) Attached to: Comcast Expanding Data Cap Locations, Training Reps To Avoid Subject
Its absolutely true. Its not actually about the profits, its about encouraging usage of their Video on Demand and Streampix services over netflix. If you can get television and internet for the same price as you can just get internet and netflix then why wouldnt you just pay one bill for more? Their data cap is exactly what that is for, to discourage netflix users, and when i worked for comcast that was 100% of the customers that I saw with overages.

Comment Re:Double Irish (Score 1) 825

by arekin (#48988653) Attached to: Obama Proposes One-Time Tax On $2 Trillion US Companies Hold Overseas

Municipal taxes are the only taxes that provide any real value. Everything on your list is funded by municipal taxes. The federal government provides a lot less value for tax dollars. How large of a military does the US need for example?

Lets start, no one said exclusively federal taxes were bullshit, the original comment said taxes in general were bullshit. Second not all roads are funded with municipal taxes, Interstates are matched with federal funding. Third the federal government contributes 140 billion to education each year, not close to a military budget but still a contribution.

Comment Re: Double Irish (Score 1) 825

by arekin (#48978387) Attached to: Obama Proposes One-Time Tax On $2 Trillion US Companies Hold Overseas

Do you mean to say my taxes only pay for the desirable things my government does, and at the best possible price at all times? And that without this small group having a unilateral right to help themselves to other people's money -- so long as they honor bureaucratic protocols of course -- civilization would collapse into a Mad Max dytopia?

OP said "It's a stupid system, where people have to pay taxes, but get no benefit from them. " I never said that there couldn't be more efficient ways of doing things, but to imply that there is literally zero benefit would be very much incorrect. We gain large benefits from our taxes daily, misused or otherwise.

Comment Re:Antitrust lawsuit? (Score 1) 303

by arekin (#46237435) Attached to: Comcast To Buy Time Warner Cable In $44.2 Billion All-Stock Deal
Its not the companies that restrict area. An area cable franchise authority grants franchise rights in an area which limits a number of providers to a single area. This is probably a good idea as allowing every provider access to easement or run lines on poles would be a mess. You would also have to worry about planes dropping out of the sky or birth defects at some point due to the line egress.

Comment Could be a good thing. (Score 1) 303

by arekin (#46237351) Attached to: Comcast To Buy Time Warner Cable In $44.2 Billion All-Stock Deal
One of the main factors that cause cable television bills to increase is Channel Providers raising costs on cable companies. ESPN has been notorious for raising rates over the years. If the cable company gets bigger it has better negotiating power to maintain current rates (what broadcaster is going to loose 3 million subscribers by pissing off the cable company in negotiations). I doubt that the current rates will decrease, but it could stabilize costs some. This is not to mention that Time Warner actually has worse consumer reviews than Comcast. Time Warner customers would likely see an improvement.

Comment Re:Antitrust petition (Score 4, Interesting) 303

by arekin (#46237261) Attached to: Comcast To Buy Time Warner Cable In $44.2 Billion All-Stock Deal
This isn't antitrust. Most areas restrict cable franchising so you don't have multiple providers in an area. If Comcast were to buy WOW in areas they both exist (Such as Michigan, maybe available elsewhere) it would restrict competition. Since Comcast and Time Warner don't overlap there is not antitrust issue.

Comment Re:They aren't whistleblowing. (Score 1) 441

by arekin (#46047505) Attached to: Why Whistleblowers Can't Get a Fair Trial

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions" There is always someone else you can go to. Are you telling me that in 435 representatives in the house, 100 members of senate, not to mention all of the white house staff that may have some authority to take it beyond themselves and get you in touch with someone who will listen and take action. This is not mentioning their own chain of command and those related to their chain of command. There is no possible way that there people even began to exhaust internal channels to do this, They wanted to play hero, or perhaps the money was worth needing asylum in a non-extradition country.

Comment Re:They aren't whistleblowing. (Score 1) 441

by arekin (#46047369) Attached to: Why Whistleblowers Can't Get a Fair Trial
Doesn't work that way, you don't get to just tell top secret information to everyone, no matter what you consider a higher authority. As may people have replied in this fashion I will state this once, here. I don't support the idea of a government having free reign to do what it likes, but I'm not naive enough to believe that a government can operate with full disclosure to its people. Military operations and technical development are a good example of things that we should not be broadcasting. We as a country need some degree of intelligence community to determine if others intend us harm, and that may well walk the line. We need people who suspect wrong doing to work within channels to ensure that they do not do harm. I don't agree with the NSA's observation, but I also don't agree that Snowden did anyone any favors, nor do I suspect that he did it with purely altruistic motives.

Comment They aren't whistleblowing. (Score 0, Troll) 441

by arekin (#46045053) Attached to: Why Whistleblowers Can't Get a Fair Trial
Whistleblowing would be reporting to a higher authority wrongdoing within the government. That means that they are reporting to someone within the government that is higher up. These people are reporting outside the government channels, and as such are leaking information. When they leak information it is possible that people get hurt. God knows what undercover agents names, or information that could lead to that agents identity, Snowden has been passing around China and Russia under the guise of freedom of information.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Trust me. I know what I'm doing." -- Sledge Hammer

Close