151–160 of 181 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the revenue extraction POV, the optimum price is such that user is unhappy to pay it, but is still paying, while raising the price even by a small amount would convince the user to cancel the service. This means that the companies are constantly testing this edge, and check whether too many subscribers start to fall off the edge when the price rises.
When being a douchebag becomes a proper economic principle.
Why must the Europeans be like this? Why do they insist on fucking with a free and open internet instead of addressing the apparently unmet demand that is fueling a black market?
For one simple reason. If the US wants some content gone from the internet, they (usually) have enough might to make that happen. Most major tech companies are registered in the US, and can be ordered by a US court to stop providing services to pirates. This notably includes most major DNS registrars, reputable ad networks and major payment processors. There's no point in blocking a website if you can just boot it of…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the revenue extraction POV, the optimum price is such that user is unhappy to pay it, but is still paying, while raising the price even by a small amount would convince the user to cancel the service. This means that the companies are constantly testing this edge, and check whether too many subscribers start to fall off the edge when the price rises.
This is only true in economics model that do not take any morality or the customer's satisfaction into account.
Entities like corporations aren't conscious and have no morality. They often discover and apply such things much like the biological evolution discovers and applies things. The closest proxy to morality that affects corporations is law; I assume here a completely legal, free interaction where the customer is not even held by an imperfect, monopoly-dominated market, like suburban internet access, or, well, sports events broadcasting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can peer with large local providers / exchanges and rent some of their local storage capacity without owning that equipment, and without having corporate presence in Italy. (You don't have to be German to rent a Hetzner server, do you?)
That's enough of a corporate presence. Whatever they have in Italy can be shut down. You don't get to not follow the law just because you're buying from a vendor.
Not a big difference for the customers in Italy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure how there's any ambiguity to this? We're talking about the EU here. The same laws that enable you to do business across borders without having a legal presence in every country also outline how to deal with issues like these.
They need to say "fuck off, then, enjoy EuropeNet" and ignore their demands. There should be zero ambiguity and zero compliance. The internet doesn't work if arbitrary restrictions on speech get imposed. You cannot give a single goddamn inch or they will claw miles away, insidiously inserting their ever growing list of forbidden things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well again, when does “meddling“ starts and when does “provide good conditions for a thriving civilisation” starts. I think I want the government to chase criminals. Although I agree that movies piracy is really low on my list of priorities when it comes to criminals. But instead of DNS they should actually simply delete the files. It’s so simple, yet no one does it. All these forums host the files (except torrent) o…
Piracy is low on my list too, but so are people who do drugs as long as they do it at home[1], responsibly, so called productive junkies. Child porn is indeed high on the list, though. Honestly, in the US, obesity is probably the number 1 factor for all sorts of illnesses and expenses, yet we do not restrict people's food, we leave it up to them, in fact, recent trends are all about how it is OK to be obese, so why c…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So is Facebook and Instagram. We’re only talking about banning the foreign one. Also, by that logic, all publishing is potentially a “national security concern”.
Banning /foreign/ influence and propaganda? Why would a country want to do that I wonder? We should bring back RT while we're at it then eh?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
CF blocking a whole country like this would be interesting... basically half the internet would stop working, probably a bunch of italian government stuff too, and people would hopefully blame the government, because i'm pretty sure there are almost zero italian voters who wanted this from their representatives. Sadly, companies bow down instead of just risk it once.
Are you suggesting that it is a good thing for corporations to be more powerful than governments?
The people on the other hand should demand their government to do what they (the people) wan't, and yes, people should be more powerful than the government, even if it's something like a piracy dns ban.