Vault of Fail #8

It's to do with the recent net neutrality legislation that was passed, which in fact is far from advertised. ISPs are very happy, when it should be the other way around.

 

The legislation didn't do any of the stuff your post portrayed. Infact there are supposed to be 100 or so laws created for content on the internet (in the U.S.) but that still has to be voted on and agreed upon. It will be 3 yrs at least before anything is done regarding that. The only bad thing they did was give wireless ISP providers the right to charge for content due to bandwidth restictions. They said they can keep thier structure so that people wont be torrenting gigs of info (porn) through thier networks. Fine that's all good. BUT what if one day in 10 years all major ISPs go wirless? What then? Does that mean that the net nutrality laws go out the eindow as they don't apply to wireless ISPs? Something to think about.
FAil for the panic on the Net Nutrality BTW. ISPs can't charge you for a website. Only the website can charge you.

 

seems like nobody here knows wats up behind this issue, pls read the first 3 or so pages of this thread @ [H] (before it jumps the shark) or just enjoy this :\

 

i raise you one headshot

 

That is what Net Nutarality is going to prevent (I am not sure what side you were trying to portray with this pic so I will assume. If I got it wrong I mean no offence. ). That thread @ [H] is all over the map. Some say Net Nutrality = the pic above and some say it is what is trying to prevent. Incase anyone doesn't know, Net Nutrality will prevent it. "Prevent" it.
The Gov't wants to prevent companys form segregating websites. They can charge per use (bandwidth if you will) but not per website. In other words Net Nutrality means that all web sites are equal and if you pay for internet access you have access to the whole internet and all the web sites in the WWW.
What companies want is what the above picture is portraying. The picture is a moc up and not actually real world. It is a representation of what the net will look like if there was no Net Nutrality.
One last time, Net Nutrality = Good. More in line to what we have now.
No Net Nutrality = Bad. It will be a similar model to what Cell Phone ISPs are offering. Pay per web site like cable TV where you pay per channel or package.
Phew.
Carry on. Sorry for the OT.

 

Actually, they can, they can block the traffic to the website and they either charge you or the website owner or both to unblock the traffic. There are ways to avoid this bloackage but that is another subject.

 

http://www.break.com/index/guy-makes-race-car-sounds-while-sedated-1974361 LOL

 

I wonder if all that is fixed with a new dns server like at hotels

 

Last time. The Net Nutrality Laws will make blocking content for a price on the ISP side illegal. If the web site wants to charge you that is another thing. Hotel WIfi/interanet isn't same thing at all. Private vs Public. If I want to charge my neighbour to use my WiFi and block certain sites I can. I can also charge them extra if they want to see those sites. An ISP is to provide internet access. Not website access.
Back on topic.
Those gifs with people cutting trees and getting owned are friggin hillarious.

 

omg did he died?!
...all jokes aside didn't it smell like mother nature died around the tower for a while?!

 

Heat could potentially help to zombify it

 

Not sure if anyone has seen this pic, after some whiskey, we decided to copy it yesterday haha!
Original


My buddy, photoshopped by me.

 

reminds me of this:

 

haha yes! Those photos are so hilarious!

 

@Renegade8100

awesome clips XD