News Stories

[GDB]

Other services have to be available before he can switch to them. There are quite a lot of places where Comcast is the only option for any speed over 100kb/s.

In fact, after reading this a bit more, I think it's the same guy who put up his own version of the story (ie: not filtered through a reporter) on Kotaku. All the points line up (and after going and looking up the Kotaku article, same name so definitely the same guy), and he mentioned in his article that there was no alternative to Comcast.

Kotaku article here: http://kotaku.com/5820450/the-day-co...net-for-1-year

[Tsuyoshi]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

He got banned for not abiding by his ToS, which exist because his overusage degrades the quality for other clients, because his ISP refuses to invest in the necessary infrastructure...

Doesn't that kinda make it not his fault, but his ISP?

[GDB]

Technically it's his fault since he agreed to it, but it does prove (as if anyone had any doubts) what a shitty company Comcast is.

[Tsuyoshi]

Originally Posted by GDB

Technically it's his fault since he agreed to it, but it does prove (as if anyone had any doubts) what a shitty company Comcast is.

I don't blame him for overusing the service when he's a gaming consultant, and for a service provider, they really don't show much care for their customers by trying to improve the service available.

[GDB]

Originally Posted by Tsuyoshi

they really don't show much care for their customers

Why do you think they won the Golden Poo Award in 2010?

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by Tsuyoshi

Doesn't that kinda make it not his fault, but his ISP?

I'm not trying to lay blame. I'm just saying, it wasn't over 5 bucks.

[DonQuigleone]

When I was living in the US for a while I was on Comcast, and I have to agree that the service left something to be desired, though I experienced no problems per se.

[ganbaru]

Israel boycotts the boycotters
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle2096480/

The country’s attorney-general worried it might not be constitutional. The Prime Minister absented himself from the vote without explanation. Yet even with such ominous behaviour, Israel’s parliament has passed a controversial law that is drawing sharp criticism from even the country’s supporters, who accuse it of violating Israel’s own democratic principles

[Ithekro]

So being allowed to sue boycotters of Israeli institutions and companies? Sounds like they've gotten tired of the various boycotts of anything to deal with the West Bank from their own people and the Arab Israelis. (They can deal with the international boycotters afterwards)

I think I can understand the feeling, but their constitution likely says otherwise to the idea.

[bladeofdarkness]

its a retarded move, that benefits no one, and it probably will be struck down by the supreme court as unconstitutional.
the people behind it should be getting their political asses kicked for doing this.

aside from being terrible P.R, this law is pointless.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

I think I can understand the feeling, but their constitution likely says otherwise to the idea.

That't the mayor point here, the supreme court will have to say if it pass on a constitutional point.
But there's one point; some of this law's supporters are menassing to change the way the supreme court's juge are selected if the juges found the law inconstitiuonal.

[bladeofdarkness]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

That't the mayor point here, the supreme court will have to say if it pass on a constitutional point.
But there's one point; some of this law's supporters are menassing to change the way the supreme court's juge are selected if the juges found the law inconstitiuonal.

its basically a "right wing" vs "left wing" internal conflict.
for over a decade now, you have a situation in Israel where the political left grows weaker and the right grows stronger (I.E, more people vote right then left) while at the same time, institutions that are normally associated with left wing world views (namely, the press, artists and the supreme court) are becoming more open about their left leaning tendencies.
the more the left becomes a vocal minority, the more "vocal" it becomes, and i suspect that part of the idea behind the law was just an attempt by the right wing to flex their muscles.

basically, passing such a law, not out of an actual belief that such a law will actually enter into effect, but rather to show that they CAN pass such a law, as a way of showing dominance in the Knesset (Israeli parliament).

like i said, stupid and pointless.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Tsuyoshi

I don't blame him for overusing the service when he's a gaming consultant, and for a service provider, they really don't show much care for their customers by trying to improve the service available.

i recently switch my business phone and internet service to comcast. Before i switch i ask the rep about the cap and he said there was no cap for business accounts. Since this guy is by definition running a business, he probably should have switch form the cheaper consumer acct to the more expensive business acct but without the limits.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

its a retarded move, that benefits no one, and it probably will be struck down by the supreme court as unconstitutional.
the people behind it should be getting their political asses kicked for doing this.

aside from being terrible P.R, this law is pointless.

Why don't they tone down the boycotts covertly using Mossad? Like, buy out members of the US government similar to what the KCIA tried to do in 1976?

[Ithekro]

I don't see that working considering these are boycotts against buying products made in the West Bank, or against services provided by companies that have establishments in the West Bank. Boycotts by Israeli citizens, against Israeli citizens.

Well and boycotts against the settlements existing, but that's more the Arab Israeli taking the direct approach short of resorting to terrorism and violence.

A problem they seem to have is with international protesters that break laws or put themselves in harms way...such as getting in front of bulldozers or running blockades without heeding the Israeli authorities (generally the military). These seem to be more of a real problem. The boycotts are an economic problem.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

I don't see that working considering these are boycotts against buying products made in the West Bank, or against services provided by companies that have establishments in the West Bank. Boycotts by Israeli citizens, against Israeli citizens.

Well and boycotts against the settlements existing, but that's more the Arab Israeli taking the direct approach short of resorting to terrorism and violence.

A problem they seem to have is with international protesters that break laws or put themselves in harms way...such as getting in front of bulldozers or running blockades without heeding the Israeli authorities (generally the military). These seem to be more of a real problem. The boycotts are an economic problem.

Maybe a land parcel swap agreement instead of just giving up the entire West Bank?

[ganbaru]

News International CEO Rebekah Brooks resigns over phone hacking scandal
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle2098316/

[Ithekro]

Until Israel gets something that isn't a conservative government, they aren't going to give up even a centimeter of land. The idea of "We won it fair and square" use to be the acceptable way to claim land. Now it seems to be the practice of land grabbing and who can use the land more efficiently (Homesteading).

Just be glad they don't have a real Zionist governement. Then they would be trying to take Jordan all the time.

[bladeofdarkness]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

Just be glad they don't have a real Zionist governement. Then they would be trying to take Jordan all the time.

as a Zionist myself, i find that both insulting and ignorant.
the peace between Israel and both Egypt AND Jordan (as well as the land-swaps that it included), was signed by people who would kick your ass if you accused them of NOT being "real" Zionists.
don't confuse the bullshit quasi-messianic "greater Israel" ideology that drives the settlers, with Zionism, which is simply "Jewish nationalism/self determination".

[Ithekro]

I apologies. The presentation I got at the local Jewish Community Center presented Zionism as those that wanted a "Greater Isreal" with the pre-1920s borders for Palestine under the British agreement to hand over the whole thing to the Jews should they win the First World War. Before the split that broke it into Palestine and Trans-Jordan.

Perhaps the term "real" should have been "radical" instead?