Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Descan]

An actual aboveground test would still be a hell of a provocation and the aboveground test isn't going to be done on North Korean soil.

What the response is depends on what exactly happened, and a small miscalculation on NKs part (like the trajectory of the rocket screwing up) could result in getting attacked. I'm pretty sure that NK and Kim Jong-Un know that detonating a nuke aboveground would be a risky move in the very extreme or they'd have done one already.

They can't do it on their own territory, the US and Russia had the luxury of wide open and remote places to do testing, NK doesn't. The only places that they can do it is over the ocean, but where? Doing it in the sea of Japan isn't an option because it'd be too close for everybody involved. Out in the open seas? No guarantee that Trump won't see that as a complete provocation. And in all options, the radioactive fallout that gets blown around will piss off everybody.

I doubt they'll actually do an aboveground test because there is practically no room for error.

Aboveground tests are banned ("banned") internationally. I'm sure Kim Jong Un doesn't care per se, but violating that would give everyone an excuse to steamroll the Norks, and he knows that.

[Dorsidwarf]

Neither China nor North Korea are signatories to the partial test ban treaty, which is what bans atmospheric nuclear testing. It would be no more illegal than any of their other nuclear tests - not that legality is the issue, rather its "how much danger is it placing on the neighbouring countries and will they attack in response?"

[Max™]

North Korea is built on their national identity as the last bastion of some ur-culture or some bullshit like that, pinned in by superpowers on all sides, wronged by having SK taken from them, and accordingly they prefer to "stand up to the world" over "kicking a dragon or bear or eagle in the dick and getting shitstomped in horrific fashion" so they love Trump being dumb enough to engage them by playing the buffoon-in-chief role overseas while fatty wolfs down another noble nork child because he needs his strength to hold off the world!

Also: title II status was moving the internet towards being an official utility, rather than a de facto one, they operate under different rules which I think most people would be more comfortable having the internet fall under than a profit driven free-for-all.

[sluissa]

There's been a lot of "But the rules haven't been in place long and haven't been enforced." And "They're not doing anything wrong." Going on, but remember, they have been taking advantage of that, it's just in ways we've gotten used to.

Netflix IS paying higher prices for their bandwidth. Costs that are passed on to those of us who have subscriptions. Zero rating has been a thing for a while and is no different than simply raising the prices on everything else to favor one thing. ISPs have been throttling for years for protocols they don't like. (Bittorrent was a frequent target, and while used for less legal activities, does have plenty of legal uses as well. Most game launcher/updaters now produced by large companies implement some form of p2p sharing of files.)

These are all things we've grumbled about, but on their own wasn't typically something to cause a huge fuss over. However they all allow big players to stifle out competition. They allow censorship to happen even more easily than was the case before. They hold back technologies that are a benefit to everyone simply because they're hard to control by the ones in charge.

This is, or rather, should be the breaking point. To put it in Ameripol terms, this is the Boston Tea Party. We've Declared our Rights and Grievences. And they don't like it. They refuse to negotiate and follow some simple rules that give us a modicum of assurance that we will be treated fairly. Therefore it is now time to suggest that we take control away from them completely. Not that I expect that to be palatable to anyone without some digital bloodshed happening. But it's long past time that we've allowed them to control a vital service, a requirement of interacting in this age, to the extent they do. And this goes not only for the ISPs, but to a lesser extent Google, Facebook, Apple. Any monopoly, no matter how it has sprung up, should not be allowed to tower over the field and by its mere presence cause others to reconsider their actions when those actions are in good faith and intended for the good of all.

[Gizogin]

Net neutrality violations have absolutely happened. You know that thing about "fast lanes", where ISPs prioritize certain content over others? Comcast did that in 2012. To be specific, they deliberately and specifically exempted their own video streaming service from their monthly data cap. They justified it through some back-end technicalities, basically arguing that the streaming "content is being delivered over our private IP network and not the public Internet."

How about when, again in 2012, AT&T blocked FaceTime over mobile data? To be able to use FaceTime over cellular data, instead of just over wi-fi, you had to purchase a data plan that also included unlimited voice and text. Now, AT&T claimed that it was in the interest of managing bandwidth, and it's true that a video-streaming service like FaceTime is a bit of a data hog. However, AT&T already charged users more for using more cellular data, so they were basically trying to charge users twice for the same data.

And then there's Verizon, who, in 2012 (coincidence?), blocked tethering apps, which allowed users to set up local wi-fi networks by using their mobile devices effcetively as modems. Verizon charged a $20 fee for their own tethering service, which these apps circumvented. Note that exactly the same data is used whether it's accessed directly through a mobile device or through something tethered to it, and the owner of the tethering device is still paying for that data through their plan.

[TheBiggerFish]

I would like to direct anyone who still believes NN doesn't do anything to Techdirt, who have been watching this stuff.

[deathpunch578]

I feel the only reason people are against net neutrality is they don't fully understand it or they fell into the trap of "This political party says NN is bad for everyone" (love how people blindly follow a political party instead of looking at the issues)

[sluissa]

I would like to direct anyone who still believes NN doesn't do anything to Techdirt, who have been watching this stuff.

Techdirt is a good source to keep track of stuff, but be warned, it does spin into the tinfoil hat realm on occasion and it has a definite agenda to push which is sometimes reaches with VERY long and stretchy arms for excuses to bring it up. Still... if you go into it knowing that and simply use it as a repository for "what's happening in tech today" it covers a lot of stuff that never reaches the point of mass coverage, so you can learn a lot from it.

One of their big things is they're on the extreme end of anti-copyright/patent law opinion. I actually tend to agree with them on a lot of stuff, but I admit I'm also somewhat extreme and recognize there's a middle ground that would be, while not ideal for me, more palatable for all involved and still better than what we have.

In any case, great news site, just keep a shaker of salt next to the computer because you may not find their opinions to be to your taste, but the facts they present are pretty solid and rarely get wide attention.

[LordPorkins]

And yeah, that's the one I posted a news link of yesterday that it turned out that he is just a complete jerk.

A POLITICIAN BEING A COMPLETE JERK?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[Rolan7]

Net neutrality violations have absolutely happened. You know that thing about "fast lanes", where ISPs prioritize certain content over others? Comcast did that in 2012. To be specific, they deliberately and specifically exempted their own video streaming service from their monthly data cap. They justified it through some back-end technicalities, basically arguing that the streaming "content is being delivered over our private IP network and not the public Internet."

Interesting.  The Go90 streaming service still has a deal like this with Verizon, where it doesn't use any data.  I assume mobile networks are legally different from regular ISPs, but it still shows that this sort of thing does happen.  And people are going to accept it, because they already do with their phones.

[wierd]

T-mobile does it for Netflix too. Does not count toward the data cap.

[Folly]

If anyone ever makes an argument with the sole support of "the free market" immediately dismiss everything they are saying. I absolutely hate when people use a vague concept to somehow justify bullshit.

My Cable TV(DirecTV), Internet(U-verse), and Operating System(Windows 10) can all attest to that. All are steaming piles of crap that have only gotten worse over time despite the free market.

[MrRoboto75]

Net neutrality violations have absolutely happened. You know that thing about "fast lanes", where ISPs prioritize certain content over others? Comcast did that in 2012. To be specific, they deliberately and specifically exempted their own video streaming service from their monthly data cap. They justified it through some back-end technicalities, basically arguing that the streaming "content is being delivered over our private IP network and not the public Internet."

Interesting.  The Go90 streaming service still has a deal like this with Verizon, where it doesn't use any data.  I assume mobile networks are legally different from regular ISPs, but it still shows that this sort of thing does happen.  And people are going to accept it, because they already do with their phones.

I don't know if they are necessarily legally different, but mobile had the precedent of phone and text being limited in use per month, so people really didn't complain when data was limited per month as well.

[EnigmaticHat]

North Korea is built on their national identity as the last bastion of some ur-culture or some bullshit like that, pinned in by superpowers on all sides, wronged by having SK taken from them, and accordingly they prefer to "stand up to the world" over "kicking a dragon or bear or eagle in the dick and getting shitstomped in horrific fashion" so they love Trump being dumb enough to engage them by playing the buffoon-in-chief role overseas while fatty wolfs down another noble nork child because he needs his strength to hold off the world!

Kim Jong Un dislikes Trump.  A lot.  The great lie told to NK people is that they are better off than everyone else.  And the slightly smaller lie is that their military stacks up as... well, anything... compared to their enemies.  Its not false superiority, its false prosperity and false strength.

Kim Jong Un is, in his own way, similar to Putin and Trump.  He doesn't care about being seen as a good person, he wants to be seen as a badass.  So when previous administrations got up and denounced the NK government as a rouge state that threatens world peace, that fit with Kim Jong Un's plan.  Trump's rocket man insult, juvenile as it is, puts Kim in an awkward position.  It makes him look weak.  The public persona NK has of the "glorious leader" wouldn't allow a personal insult like that to go unchallenged.  On top of that, as the IC told Trump, Kim Jong Un is angry narcissist who responds to insults with "sometimes lethal outbursts."

For multiple reasons NK is not going to discontinue their weapons development.  And they aren't going to actually act on their threats.  So the only possible response Kim has is to ratchet up the sabre rattling and the anti-american rhetoric.  So now nuclear war is that much closer (since NK effectively has a single nuke aimed at Seoul).  Even if you're in the "MAD will never happen" camp (which I am not), every time the threat of nuclear war ramps up everyone's stress levels go up along side it.  That's bad for the health.

[Rolan7]

I don't know if they are necessarily legally different, but mobile had the precedent of phone and text being limited in use per month, so people really didn't complain when data was limited per month as well.

True.
They are literally ISPs, so one would hope they are under the same regulation.