DaddleDew @ DaddleDew @lemmy.world

Posts

22

Comments

1,571

Joined

2 yr. ago

In my area geetting that higher bandwidth is at least an extra $50/month and I'm being conservative. That's $600/year just to download games quicker.

That means that if you're buying a new massive game once every month and a half you're paying just as much for bandwidth to download the game as you're paying for the game itself.

This is not good value unless you have so much disposable income that you don't even know what to do with it.

Which supports my point that average bandwidth is not an indicator of overall quality of internet accessible to the public because it can very easily be skewed by household size.

But people read half of the first paragraph and downvote. I guess it's on me for not being concise enough.

I have 75 mbps and it's plenty enough except maybe for that one time once in a while where I'm downloading a game on Steam and would like it a little quicker. I see no point of paying three times what I'm paying right now per month to get 300 mbps. Even if it's available, even if I can afford it. I'd need to download a whole bunch of stuff at the same time to ever make use of that kind of bandwidth.

I can tell some ISPs are blatantly preying on ignorant people, selling them 300 mbps connections at a premium while all they do is google stuff, check their e-mails and browse their social media. They'll never use more than a tenth of what they're paying for, the rest is just wasted money. But they don't know that.

Average internet speeds in a country can be a very misleading stat as a result.

Edit: Looks like two people don't like that they've realized they're overpaying for their internet.

Thanks. I'm currently giving Ubuntu 14.04 LTS a try. Looks like it should work. We'll know once it's installed.

I think that a solution to people buying increasingly huge SUVs and trucks is making more roads like these

Maybe Fairphone should criticize Graphene OS for the non existent support of Fairphone devices.

Seriously I'd get a Fairphone with GrapheneOS in a heartbeat should it become available.

When the Martians from Mars Attacks! disguise as Klingons

Interesting how we've all become accustomed to the notion that "agreeing to arbitration" has just become "waving your consumer rights" and no lawmaker is pushing to have that fixed.

The little blood clot that could

"Are we the baddies?"

Symptoms of dementia flare up under stress.

Looks like the Epstein scandal is really getting to him.

That's fine. Those are the plugins you chose to install for your particular tastes and these are very important options to have available to the user should he choose to use them. That's not what I meant by "smart" features.

What I don't want is my browser with built-in modern equivalents of Bonzi Buddy that you can't remove.

I see a web browser like a TV screen. An I need it to do is display the internet with nothing in the way. Any attempt to add built-in "smart" features to it will make it worse. If I want something else added to it, I'll plug it in myself.

But Russia can target Kyiv anytime they want.

Read the whole post. I acknowledged them already and am expressing my doubts over the true motivations that drive Microsoft to force a tech like this upon all their users and express my concerns over the real use they will make of this technology.

Don't you try to change the meaning of my post just so you can have a cause to white knight over. This isn't Reddit.

An image is worth a thousand words. How is reading a text describing what is on the screen going to be better than just looking at the screen yourself, something you'll need to do to read the description anyway? Aside from accessibility for the blind, the practicality such a technology is questionable.

The motivation behind this is obviously to facilitate the collection and reporting user profiling data. Accessibility for the blind is only a side effect. Tech companies have been doing it with automated audio transcriptions for years already, now they're after what you look at on your screen.

Looks a lot like there was a past history between them and that the modes of transportation have nothing to do with it.

To be fair speed cameras are a terrible way to address the problem of speeding. The solution isn't speed limit enforcement, it is road design. If you build a wide straight open road that feels like you're driving on a highway, drivers will naturally tend to drive on it at highway speeds. Slapping a low speed limit on a road like that will make following said speed limit extremely uncomfortable and drivers will naturally tend to go too fast the moment they stop monitoring their speedometer. Hiding a speed camera on a road like that is essentially tricking people into paying an extra tax and speed cameras are often being blatantly used in that way.

The real solution to keeping speeds low is narrowing the street and also if possible making it windy. Use the space to add trees and protected bike lanes. Suddenly drivers will feel comfortable driving a slower speed without the need for a speeding camera. As a bonus it improves the safety for cyclists and pedestrians far more than a stupid speed camera ever would, and it makes the road far more enjoyable to use for everyone, including the car drivers.

These can usually be quickly and easily adjusted without tools. IMO it's kind of a douche move from the owner to not even bother checking that his sprinklers aren't spraying the sidewalk.

I had to have a double take to check that TheDailyBeast hadn't become a satire news outlet.

Anyone else saw how he had to be ushered to the back of the crowd during the trophy presentation? He really believed the cheers were for him.