An epic, colorful and fast-paced arcade game3.61 / 5.00 5,135 Views
Make your way to the next level by creating constellations!3.56 / 5.00 1,485 Views
bullet hell with a unique absorb mechanic3.56 / 5.00 6,005 Views
Damn, that really sucks for Americans. Hopefully you guys'll pull through though, It'd be pretty shitty without you guys..
Sigh. Signed this 2 days ago when i saw it on Imgur, i doubt i'd make a difference. This shit about net neutrality has been going on for years. almost a decade now, every time this gets brought back it get tougher.
I have no one style.
- Oscar Peterson
I can't believe these Co**suckers are actually trying to take a stab at the internet for more dough. Of course they would since the internet is probably the biggest thing in our lives now which is doubling in size every year. Think of all the money they could make if they could take a piece of this digital pie (internet). No matter what they get, it will be big and of course it's the nature of man to try and make money no matter the cost or sacrifice. Thing is, if these people wanted this shit, they'd probably already have it one way or another, they're probably too bored to fight an uproar from people they don't care about. Reading about this right now really pissed me off cause it isn't enough that every ISP is a scum mother fu**er, they wanna take control.
I really think if they could charge us for accessing websites with quarters like in arcades, they would... and they'd make a killing. Screw the big men at the top! Wish more people would notice this and take action.
At 7/12/17 10:54 AM, TomFulp wrote: In March, 265 members of Congress successfully voted to eliminate our Internet privacy rights, meaning your ISP is allowed to sell your personal Internet usage data. Here is a list of who they are and how much they received in contributions from broadband providers. This legislation served no useful purpose to their constituents, the whole thing was just super disgusting and everyone involved should be booted out.
It's amazing how few people know that this actually happened. I wonder if they're selling our passwords too -- since suspiciously around April, some of my accounts, including my email, were compromised.
It's the same with Net Neutrality - you will never see a single benefit of Net Neutrality being undone, it will only make your life worse. The only people who stand to benefit from it are the near-monopoly of broadband providers and they are already doing just fine - they're probably enjoying the windfall of selling your browsing info!
Quote for truth!
Thanks for reading and sorry if the "Slow Lane" overlay startled you! It's important that everyone is aware of what is going on. Along with a million other issues, please keep this in mind the next time your chance to vote comes around.
Didn't startle me. Annoyed me after it popped up a few times and I'd already done the little form. I also had already filled out the battleforthenet form.
At 7/12/17 01:24 PM, TomFulp wrote:At 7/12/17 01:04 PM, Slint wrote: How come your text is always in brighter colors than the rest of the plebeian scum population on this website?Ya know that's a good question... Staff has always been a brighter white, maybe we should ditch that when the forums move to the new layout. Or make it... a supporter feature...
I've been on this website for over 8 years and I just noticed this... wow
At 7/12/17 02:37 PM, SurgeAction wrote:
Tom Fulp, I'm surprised that you of all people are a supporter of net neutrality. I've followed your website for years with all of its amazing content and diverse array of time wasting opportunities and I am befuddled as to how this site isn't at least in the top 50 globally. Looking at your comments on this issue, it's plain to see why that's the case
Okay I'm assuming that your support for net neutrality is you projecting insecurities about your own website. You are worried that sites like yours will not be able to compete without a public bureaucracy. You are literally saying, "My product is not of competitive quality, please support a politician or ideology that will force you to see it as a quality product!" People who are literally rationing out the internet so folks like you and perhaps even other companies like Verizon can stagnate and become complacent yet still turn a profit. For you to think the FCC is looking out for the "little guy" by regulating internet traffic (and creating the inequality you are complaining about) is beyond me. These centralized powers CREATE monstrosities like Facebook, Amazon, Verizon, etc. not destroy them.You admit to this yourself... You're on the wrong side of the pond Tom! "Net Neutrality basically means that your internet provider can't control your access to individual websites / internet services."
If the FCC is choosing to not provide free labor to businesses that should be accommodating themselves with their own revenue, so be it. Without the crutch afforded to certain services by free regulation via the government, these businesses would fall flat on their faces if they didn't keep up.(making way for the mom and pop sites) I believe the people should decide what products they use and when they use it-----not the government. Single payer internet would be a disaster. imagine waiting behind thousands of people in a queue just to check an e-mail. Madness!At least if Verizon starts doing all these packs and whatnot, people can simply switch to another provider. I prefer ATT and Cox lol.
The problem is, if Verizon has access to stop all of these small internet services, why would they not? All power would be in their hands, and they could just virtually shut down all sites that refuse to give them money whether via ads or hard cash. And the provider issue, well, why would other companies not do the same?
Wait, so this only affects the US? I live in Europe, but how does that work?
I still sent an email supporting Net Neutrality. Internet is for everyone! :D
At 7/16/17 04:31 PM, DoodlingHitman wrote: Wait, so this only affects the US? I live in Europe, but how does that work?
Oh, I'm sure it'll affect those outside of the US, as well. Set a precedent, if nothing else, though I'd imagine there are a handful of American sites, like this one, that would likely be negatively impacted by it, which, of course, would be felt by NG members who live outside of the states (provided those members care enough about Newgrounds, that is).
The bottom line is, without Net Neutrality the ISPs are free to charge whatever they want for poor service and there's nothing you could do about it because most areas only have a single provider.
Do you think they won't take advantage?
The lack of competition is why Comcast already sucks as bad as it does. They throw money at congress, and congress blocks other ISPs from starting up. This isn't speculation, this has actually happened several times when various communities tried to start up their own local ISPs.
The fact is, if a page takes forever to load, it really doesn't matter how good the content is.
That's why Net Neutrality is important.
People say they don't want the government deciding what sites they can access.
Net Neutrality means nobody can tell you what things you can access.
Without Net Neutrality, Comcast will be deciding what sites you can access, and they are very much for sale to the highest bidder.
As annoying as regulations can be, most of them have a purpose.
We require people to get a license to drive a car so that most people on the road have enough basic skill to not kill everyone.
You hear a lot of BS buzzwords thrown about by people against it. Buzzwords give you that reflexive emotional response that blocks out any further information.
When someone is trying to shut your brain down like that, they are trying to fuck you.
At 7/12/17 11:14 AM, Izzy-A wrote: Net Neutrality is a bad thing. More regulation for the internet is going to cause prices to go higher and quality to go down until leftists declare that we need a single payer internet.
I can't convince anyone on here who's already on board the Net Neutrality train. Please do your research, look at the counterarguments, stop falling for the propaganda and flowery language.
I'm a Telecommunications Engineer of about 7 years now.This is not an issue conjured up by 'leftists'. You're way off the mark.
Some food for thought:
1. Degrees of regulation that prevent companies from being grubby shitcunts are absolute necessity for our progress and prosperity. Did you know it used to be illegal to tamper with phones in your OWN home because everything from the CO/Linecard to your device (including the device itself) used to be owned by Bell? You couldn't even swap a cable if you wanted. There was -no- demarc. It was ILLEGAL. In addition- it was absolutely disgusting and brutal if you were a mom and pop shop trying to start up a business to compete with any of the ILECs (Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers) like Bell/AT&T, etc. They basically monopolized the market for quite some time and dropped lines just about everywhere (with a dash of a greasy pat-on-the-ass back and forth with the government to ensure the ability to communicate was propagated across the country in even the most rural areas) and dropping infrastructure is not cheap. For a monster like Bell/AT&T that has been at it for some time, this was not a problem as effectively they were the "only plumber in town" and basically scaled financially early on to roll straight into a consistent 3% of the country's GDP. Mom and pop shop? Just some dildos with no cheddar to drop on infrastructure. ILECs would crush them and did -not- have to play nice or provide access to their infrastructure. Actually, they would offer rates to 'competition' that were ludicrous and multitudes higher than operating cost to ensure entry into the market was too costly or simply impossible. In short, without horizontal and vertical deregulation (e.g. Such as the Telecomm act of 1996) we would be in the fucking stone-age still.
2. Further to the previous point- The Internet as we know it would not exist. This is a very, very long point to dig into but suffice it to say that communications corporations that were the gorilla of the market in any space had zero interest in branching out to new and interesting things as they thought 'phone' tech was sufficient. I mean, shit, it worked for over 70+ years, why fix what's not broken? In addition- the few things that they did try to 'engineer' was disgustingly inefficient, overly engineered and complicated in order to have a high bar/requirement in order to familiarize yourself with it. Ever heard of SS7? Yeah. Try explaining to anyone with half a brain that it was a good concept let alone implementation. It was pathetic. So- before the Telecomm act hit, companies were striking up lawsuits when people were starting to send signals over the ILEC's infrastructure (which, by the by, in the days of circuit switching and the ~60% Erlang's rule, still did not cause ANY actual peaks or problems, regardless of what nay-sayers might tell you), they started to shit bricks and realize it was something they needed to get on top of as it was not handled by them and could not control it. Hell, frivolous lawsuits are the reason we are behind in communications technology by a couple of decades alone. It wasn't until bulkier entities like the DOJ/Military/IMI space got involved with ARPANET that AT&T/Bell calmed their collective tits cause you don't fuck with the government at this level. Oh no. Not when they've let you run wild with 3% of the GDP for nearly 100 years. Sorry- I strayed off point for a second here. The ultimate take-away here is that the people that fucked about with sending signals over their lines that did end up entangled lawsuits had to fight an uphill battle because the ILECs were unregulated greedy shitcunts that could muscle their way into or out of any situation as they pleased. But they DID end up pioneering a platform which was alternative to the current means to communicate. I mean, shit, before any RFCs were crafted for the TCP/IP stack as we know it nowadays, these guys were fucking about and coming up with interesting stuff which folks further up the foodchain caught wind of.
3. Without proper regulation to maintain all the dominant LECs in check, we would have absolutely fucking retarded shit happening for all the wrong reasons. Let's start with when the ILECs were starting to FINALLY realize the world is bigger than telephones alone. Remember ATM? Remember that shit? Yeah. Let's talk about ATM for a second here... The cell is 53 bytes? Hmmm. Do you know why it is 53 bytes? Technical reasons? Nope. A standardized padding or overhead system that required it for in-band signalling/control? Nope. It was a fucking pissing contest between European and North American entities. It was completely arbitrary and mundane. There were a few engineers that wanted to suggest an offset based on payload sizes that are common but LOL NO FUCK THAT cause pissing contest. Regulation that was imposed by governments helped bring about global standards that are adhered to, to this day. Effectively, it was actually thanks to the Internet (you know, that pesky thing that the incumbents didn't care for at all at the time) that they're being kept in check. X over MPLS became the new ATM and even its predecessor, frame relay, proved to be far more efficient and consistent.
I could keep going on forever as to why regulation is important and necessary but let's debunk your claims that you've posted thus far:
"Net Neutrality is a bad thing. More regulation for the internet is going to cause prices to go higher and quality to go down until leftists declare that we need a single payer internet."
1. 'More regulation is going to cause prices to go higher' - What? Bullshit. You think that it is REGULATION that will cause prices to go higher? So... A momentary sidestep to educate: There is a contending idea that proposes that the other, other white meat of infrastructure (DOCSIS 3.x+ tier Cable/Coax trees) is starting to get less used because of people utilizing Netflix more and dropping their cable subscriptions. Granted, this argument holds water but not at the doomsayer levels that people speak of. Cable is on the decline because it is a dinosaur. It is disgustingly overpriced (e.g. Cost of operations vs cost it is sold at has a ridiculously huge disparity) and Netflix is cheap, utilizes smart technology (content distribution networks, etc). to help propagate itself over standard Internet. It does not require the use (but can very damn well utilize!) the standard cab/co trees that exist. Now... This does not mean this is a bad thing necessarily (getting to the part where what the doomsayers are saying is actually retarded). You're telling me that regular IPTV shit is on the decline and soaking up less bandwidth, but the cab/co trees are being used anyways to distribute Internet to end-users? Where's the fucking problem? Now... Take a step back and think of the same thing with regards to regulation. All bits are equal. Meaning that bandwidth is bandwidth is bandwidth. That is a good thing. You think that the cable companies trying to stifle cab/co trees by forcing users to stick with IPTV would actually not raise the price? If the regulation were removed? How the fuck do you think you're going to accomplish something like this on a grand scale? This isn't some piddly packeteering bullshit you're talking about. New equipment and systems to hawk-eye that shit. Who pays? You.
2 . "and quality". Nope. Horseshit. This has nothing to do with regulation in the slightest. The need for more realtime bandwidth always increases over time. Top-tier backbone providers and their peers will need to upgrade their infrastructure. Fact of the industry.
Have a good one.
At 7/12/17 10:59 AM, Kajenx wrote: This whole thing is why I call BS on conservatives when they say regulation is bad for small business and the economy. The truth is that large corporations are bad for small business and the economy, and they need to be regulated so they don't develop a stranglehold on the important aspects of our lives. We need less idealism in government and more common sense...
This is only partially true. Yes regulations are good to keep large business under control however it really makes building a small business harder, i have several family friends and family members who gave up on owning their own business because of all the regulations, and the cost of entering a market now a-days is insane, most people can't even afford all the regulation fee's, as well as all their material costs and spacing payments. Regulations can be good for larger business control but are bad for starters