Medic

Updates for the sake of updates.

Because Dota 2 makes them more money.

If he'd left it there, sure.
 
"Your parents made bad choices and my parents' were good because my parents have different political views and I have never suffered any hardship in my life because my parents love me (but yours didn't that's why their divorce was rough) here's some advice" is pretty close to the cuntiest thing Caveson has ever said, and he has some strong contenders.
 
I've given up on engaging him when he starts acting like this and I'm not sure why other people haven't already as well. He comes into a thread ENTIRELY IGNORANT of the topic of discussion (but knowing he disagrees with everyone else because he's a ball of preconceived notions), asks questions about the subject, gives up discussion after people do his god damn research for him and then starts crying about how the libruls are ruining this country and he's had it so much better than everyone else because his mommy and daddy are great.
 
He's fine to interact with in the first half of this cycle but y'all need to stop feeding him in that second half.

Wow, Cave, you really are a cunt.

Wow, Cave, you really are a cunt.

Wow, Caveson. Just.. wow.
The sheer amount of arrogance in your post is absolutely astounding, you honestly think with a post like that I'm ever going to consider for even a fraction of a second confiding in you for anything, or be interested in discussing anything with you? All I can say is congratulations on your blind delusion, I'm sure all those child-less high-school and college graduates with full-time jobs that are still stuck in poverty would love to hear such an inspiring talk.

 

*Takes deep breath*
 
Medic:

Covers Missing the Bandwagon and generally not being too fussed about the next big thing!
Gives advice On Hunting Eidolons in Warframe!
Talks about the many music genres she likes! You do you!
...And gives her opinion on the new Justice League film!
 

What part of
do you not understand, Caveson?
It's not "months" of saving, it's almost always years. If it takes you mere months to save up enough cash to move to a new fucking state, you're obviously not doing that bad in life to begin with.

I'm going to be extremely blunt - and in doing so be an asshole - but I don't give a damn about your father's story and I sure as hell didn't ask for it. Because it's exactly the same kind of bullshit that I've been hearing everywhere else about why "The left just wants everything handed to them" "Millennials are so entitled" "Kids these days want the world for nothing". It's always "My parents grew up poor, but they worked and reaped the benefits of their hard work and blah blah blah blah blah" with words like "personal responsibility", "dedication", and "determination". Caveson, you're not this bloody stupid, the entire environment of the United States was vastly different than what it is now, it's why your father was able to actually accomplish that. I don't give a damn what you believe, lack of money is precisely the reason to not move, coming from someone who is currently in a situation where moving is impossible due to financial reasons, you're looking through Red, White, and Blue filtered lenses.
Thanks for dropping the pretenses.
Fuck the "Free Market".
Actually, this more falls into "The internet is a utility - akin to electricity, water, gas, etc. - and should therefore be treated as such instead of letting corporations have unabated control over the internet", nowhere did I ever mention the internet as a "right".
Except the states won't be able handle it!
The moment a state - and, let's face it, it's going to be California - attempts to actually enact and enforce their own form of Net Neutrality, one of the major ISPs is going to sue that state. And the courts will have no choice but to side with the company because if the FCC repealed Net Neutrality, that means they obviously intended for corporations to be able to do what they're going to do, and therefore the states have no right to try to stop them. 
It's better than the complete clusterfuck you're asking for.
You're assuming a lot about what kind of pricing they're going to offer. Things that use less bandwidth will not necessarily cost an appreciable amount less, and you'll still potentially be making internet access unaffordable for people who regularly use the internet for both "low-bandwidth" and "high-bandwidth" purposes.
Gee, gotta love how you immediately jump to some kind of negative assumption of me just because you can't think of a reason so I must be lazy and don't want to do any work.

I've already been impacted by differing standards across state lines. Technically I failed the 10th grade according to Georgia's standards, even though by Florida's standards I passed. In the grand scheme of things, it's rather insignificant - that could be said about just about anything - but I remember seriously questioning how and why the standards of education varied enough just across a single state border.

The reason I'm making this argument is because the United States has hardly changed over the decades, even centuries. We're still trying to govern on a system that worked perfectly okay in the US' infancy and for some time after its formation. But we've grown tremendously since then, we're now 50 states and ~323 million people strong. Our system of governing has been showing cracks and faults for decades now, and yet, year by year, the wedges keep being driven deeper and we keep adding more wedges. At some point - be it in the near or distant future - those wedges are going to get hammered all the way through the foundations and everything's going to crumble. 2016 was a rather brilliant display of how the low the general landscape the US has reached.
You can't always say no to a corporation. For example, I don't really like doing my grocery shopping at Wal-Mart, they're not the greatest company. But there's no place around me that has prices as low as theirs, or a wide enough selection of goods my family either needs or would be willing to buy. There's a Publix closer to my house, but they're typically more expensive on just about everything my family needs and uses. There's an ALDI somewhere around here, but it's far enough out and out of the way enough that we'd be spending every potential penny we saved on gas. So I bite my tongue and get my groceries from Wal-Mart, because they're cheaper and we can save that money in case something happens. Corporations don't need to outright force you to buy their products, they can still get you to buy their stuff in a number of indirect ways.

And I'd thank you to not make such generalizing statements about my life when you know nothing about it. Disconnecting from the internet entirely would likely drive me to suicide - I'm an introvert and suffer from anxiety, I don't want to go out and meet with people, I dislike being alone in large crowds, so I don't want to go "experience the real world", whatever the fuck that means, and certainly not for any lengthy period of time - the "simpler things" in my life are chatting and gaming with friends I've made across the globe online. I don't have "my friend"s outside of the internet anymore - I don't have anyone I can call up or text and say "Let's hang out" or "Mind if I come over?" - I have "our friend"s, and even then I see them about once a month now. As edgy as it sounds, I don't have anything out there for me aside from some leisurely stuff I can't do at home. As pathetic as it sounds, my life is online. I already suffer from depression and feelings of loneliness, I don't need my one connection I feel the most comfortable with fucked with by some greedy conglomerate that's only interested in money I don't have.

The Net Neutrality "laws" are more a classification than anything. Access to the internet is deemed a telecommunications utility and therefore falls under the same rules as phone service, as a simplification of the issue.
 
"The internet" isn't considered anything much like "the phone network" or whatever is. Access to the internet however is deemed currently as a basic utility along the same lines as phones and cable/satellite TV, whose providers (most of the same companies, in fact, since Comcast, Verizon, and Century Link at least all have their own phone and TV services too) also already fall under the exact same rules that are currently protecting Net Neutrality.
 
I'm unsure if you're arguing that these services should also be "unshackled" from government oversight as well or you've merely misunderstood what's going on.
 
These are not new rules. They've been in place for over 50 years (over 80 in one form or another) [Edit: Correction, over 150 years in one form or another], it's merely the classification of internet access that is fairly recent as a simple ruling on something that has been in place in one form or another since close to the internet's inception, since ISPs have been trying to throttle access to certain sites (among other things) for at least that long.
 
Net Neutrality does not protect from a theoretical threat, all of these laws and classifications stem from ISPs (primarily Comcast) having attempted in the past to do the exact same things people are afraid they will do now.
 
The Wikipedia page is pretty thorough. Some of this I didn't know precisely until now (though I was certain about the Title II classification and what it meant), it's actually an interesting read.
 
As for this:
 
 
It is when it's blindly assuming and declaring that the government is bad no matter what. By all means, advocate for a smaller government presence where they're not needed or actively make things worse, but complaining about the government making the lives of its people better is asinine. The entire point of a government is to serve its people to the best of its ability. Saying any government intervention is bad is just advocating anarchism which, yes, is edgy. It's probably the most stereotypically edgy emo teen thing that exists.

This is such a bizarre argument to make in this particular case. The only way the government is "controlling" the internet is having a regulation that no one is allowed to control the internet. Your stance is basically akin to this:
 
Major automotive companies start adopting highways across the United States. They are granted permits to set up toll stations along the highways they own, so that on a road owned by Toyota, only owners of Toyota cars can expect to drive with any expectation of a reliable speed. Drivers of every other brand have to drive in slow lanes, or pay tolls to get into faster lanes, or may not be able to drive on those roads at all. Clearly no one wants this. The government steps in and says "This fucking sucks. Roads need to be reliable and accessible to everyone within reason." and sets up a regulation to end the practice. By your logic, the government is being the tyrannical party in this situation even though it's clear they're acting in the best interests of the public, which is their job.

So I got a call from someone wanting to do a survey. I answer in English since I was just talking in English to someone else. The person on the phone asks if I speak Greek, as the survey is in Greek. I answer "όχι" which means no in Greek and tell them I'm not interested, again in Greek. They apologise for the inconvenience, say they are only looking for Greek speakers, and hang up.

So I got a call from someone wanting to do a survey. I answer in English since I was just talking in English to someone else. The person on the phone asks if I speak Greek, as the survey is in Greek. I answer "όχι" which means no in Greek and tell them I'm not interested, again in Greek. They apologise for the inconvenience, say they are only looking for Greek speakers, and hang up.

So I got a call from someone wanting to do a survey. I answer in English since I was just talking in English to someone else. The person on the phone asks if I speak Greek, as the survey is in Greek. I answer "όχι" which means no in Greek and tell them I'm not interested, again in Greek. They apologise for the inconvenience, say they are only looking for Greek speakers, and hang up.

It's not about trust. These laws have a proven track record of working for the benefit of everyone. Repealing them has no tangible benefit in the current landscape of ISP semi-monopolies, and repealing them now can do nothing but harm.
 
Yes, it's all trendy and edgy to be like "Lel the government is evil they shouldn't touch or do anything" right now but fact of the matter is sometimes, as shown in this case, government regulation has a net benefit for everyone but the executives of these ISPs.
 
On the other side, yeah, no shit Amazon/Netflix/Etc. stand to gain from these laws staying in place and that's why they advocate for them. So? What's the issue with that? It's a win-win in that case, that's a GOOD thing.
 
Again, yeah, it's cool and edgy to bitch about corporations making money these days, but at least attempt to look at the bigger picture. Bad for corporations =/= good for everybody else and vice versa. If you want to talk about trust, can always trust a megacorp to do what's in their best interests and they have a lot of swing in that regard. Why be pissed when it swings in your favor because interests align for once? Just so you can shoot yourself in the foot to "stick it to the man"?

Yeah, gigantic profit-hungry corporations rule the world. Big whoop.
 
The difference is, if the gigantic, profit-hungry ISPs aren't beholden to Net Neutrality rules, they can completely control what you see, hear, and do on the net. They could, for example, bar access to news and social media sites that promote views they don't like. Netflix and Amazon don't have that kind of power over anything outside their own sites and services.
 
(You could argue Google has way too much power over what you see, but at least they can't prevent you from visiting any particular sites)

Honestly the demo (NOT A BETA) of Destiny 2 was enough for me. It just wasn't interesting.

Buncha people with the letter M browsing. Totally not a conspiracy or anything.

Buncha people with the letter M browsing. Totally not a conspiracy or anything.

No, I'm not obsessed. I only went to my local Comic Con wearing this and having kids stare at me all day because they couldn't work out what I was. Also I never really showed off pictures when I wrote those Daily SPUF articles, and most of the costume (apart from the weapons, helmet, boots and lighting) went in the bin once Comic Con was over.
 
It's made out of cardboard, foam and a shitty kids police helmet that I found in the back of my cupboard.

Started work as a temporary administrator around 3 1/2 weeks ago, and although I've been hearing rumblings about it for the past week or so I've had it confirmed today that they want to take me on as a permanent contract and give me a promotion into a different team that they'll be starting in the new year as a data analyst. 

You wouldn't steal a blog post...

Problem is, it's almost NEVER an alternative to DLC and other microtransactions, it's alongside. And development costs are not so high as to really require such a huge influx of cash regardless, the normal $60 pricetag is more than enough (regardless of what execs may imply, the cost to create most games has gone down over the years, not up).

No, I'm not obsessed. I only went to my local Comic Con wearing this and having kids stare at me all day because they couldn't work out what I was. Also I never really showed off pictures when I wrote those Daily SPUF articles, and most of the costume (apart from the weapons, helmet, boots and lighting) went in the bin once Comic Con was over.
 
It's made out of cardboard, foam and a shitty kids police helmet that I found in the back of my cupboard.

Today's article is the 1700th article on the site! Huzzah!

Medic conjures up some sweet treats for halloween! They all look great! Slightly envious of the food disposal role being taken, but I suppose that's what the recipe is for!  Those ghosts are criminally adorable btw lol