61–70 of 76 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My temporary solution is to right click and select Inspect Element in Chrome. Then find the "overlay" div and set the z-index to 0. This pushes that to the bottom of the pile and you can browse normally again. For me personally I think it sits b/c my work proxy has an ad blocker.
Thanks! Even simpler fix for lazy: Inspect Element, right click on the element in the developer pane, and choose "delete node".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, but other subscribers paid as much as you but may not be using Youtube as heavily. When they do use Youtube, they want that fast connection, but in aggregate they use less capacity because they are less frequent users. Charging Youtube is one way to account for this difference in usage. Charging consumers based on aggregate usage (like mobile carriers now do) would be another way.
so all you are saying is that some people pay for (N gigabytes per month) and actually use N, while others pay for the same plan but only use a fraction of N?
Granted, Andreesen was talking about mobile where pricing is N gigs/month, but even that structure might not capture true cost. It also depends when the user uses that bandwidth. During peak hours, capacity is short and end-user Quality of Service might get degraded to accommodate. Rather than complicating end-user pricing with these issues (like charging $Y for X bits at ZZ:ZZ PM), it might make sense to charge the content providers.
Netflix, for instance, during peak hours, accounts for 32.7% of all internet traffic: http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/technolog/netflix-uses-32-....
Who knows what the best solution is. Maybe it's charging content providers, maybe end-users. The point is that it's not a good idea to have the government set a one-size-fits-all solution.
qz.com will not render with Ghostery enabled. Also, what's with that qz.com headline? Why, exactly, do we care about the gonzo-reaction of a tech blogger (the "sit up and listen" bit.) It's just a fluffy throw-away expression and comes across as the reddit equivalent of "shit just got real." I understand: they're summarizing 8 insights from Andressen, but strictly speaking, the headline is about the reporter instead…
Say what you will about his actual opinions, I think it's refreshing to hear someone who is willing to say what he believes despite popular concurrence with his opinions. Very tired of the echo chamber in the tech community. As for the article, many of these seem like realistic perspectives, even if they discomfort the typical listener.
Scrolling up and down on that page causes the URL to change to reflect the article you are now viewing. I'm pretty certain this is a bad idea.
Andreessen is gone. The transformation is complete. He has lost all legitimacy beyond being a fat cat that manipulates markets by sheer power of money and influence in the inefficient way that monopolists do.
Scrolling up and down on that page causes the URL to change to reflect the article you are now viewing. I'm pretty certain this is a bad idea.
I suspect that either Ghostery or AdBlock Plus is nuking it. After reading the comments here I guess I won't bother disabling them to read the article.
Either the author or Andreesen completely misunderstands or misrepresents the concept of network neutrality. Network neutrality doesn't mean users don't pay for the bandwidth they consume. It means they pay the same price for that bandwidth regardless of what it's used for.
Exactly. The telcos want to charge Youtube (and others) more money for a faster connection to me, but I already paid for my connection to be fast. Those aren't Youtube's bits coming to me over the wire though, they are mine. I paid for them, both in money to the telco for my connection through them, and to Youtube with my attention to their ads.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lots of people were in that right place at the right time, but Andreesen made it happen. Then he made it happen again with Loudcloud/Opsware. Two billion dollar companies. There was a lot of hard work and intelligence behind his being in the right place at the right time.
"Loudcloud" Loudcloud was a failure. It morphed into opsware. So he was wrong about loudcloud (timing and otherwise). http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/07/23/marc-andreessens-lo... "After many adventures–in which the young company suffered many defeats, "