The FCC just KILLED Net Neutrality

[bomerr]

12 hours ago, mr moose said:

That's his whloe point, there is no way to effectively implement it because of that.

we use blockchain technology. 

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, bomerr said:

we use blockchain technology. 

o.k, I don't really follow why that makes any difference.  Block chains (especially private ones) don't make the voting end of the network or the server end of the chain any more secure.

[leadeater]

53 minutes ago, mr moose said:

o.k, I don't really follow why that makes any difference.  Block chains (especially private ones) don't make the voting end of the network or the server end of the chain any more secure.

Also blockchain isn't the answer to everything, buzz words don't ya love em.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

Also blockchain isn't the answer to everything, buzz words don't ya love em.

yep.

 

I did read an article from Harvard business that said block chains at some point in the next decade will become an integral part of contracts and the like, simply because once the data is entered into the chain it becomes almost impossible to alter.  This sounds great for voting, however the vote has to get into the chain unaltered first.  

[leadeater]

Just now, mr moose said:

yep.

 

I did read an article from Harvard business that said block chains at some point in the next decade will become an integral part of contracts and the like, simply because once the data is entered into the chain it becomes almost impossible to alter.  This sounds great for voting, however the vote has to get into the chain unaltered first.  

It's also not unthinkable due to the size of a voting network that an outside entity could have more than 51% compute power and get unauthorized access to the network and take it over. Blockchain is only safe with scale, it's actually a poor choice for small implementations.

[Hellion]

On 12/20/2017 at 1:21 AM, asus killer said:

No. It's first not an example of nothing, it's a fact, in this case a decision of the UNHRC. Second it proves you are wrong, the UN represents almost all countries, so one or two that do not agree is irrelevant, including yourself

When the US government picks and chooses which UN policies they will and won't follow (see several of the wars they have started despite the UN condemning them) this argument is irrelevant.

 

What the UN decides makes no difference to the US and they aren't reprimanded for failure to comply.

 

US citizens will continue to get raped by ISP’s because they would rather sit back and take it on the chin (whining on the internet) then actually do anything of substance about it because the internet is “too precious” for them to go without to force a point.

 

[asus killer]

11 hours ago, Hellion said:

When the US government picks and chooses which UN policies they will and won't follow (see several of the wars they have started despite the UN condemning them) this argument is irrelevant.

 

What the UN decides makes no difference to the US and they aren't reprimanded for failure to comply.

 

US citizens will continue to get raped by ISP’s because they would rather sit back and take it on the chin (whining on the internet) then actually do anything of substance about it because the internet is “too precious” for them to go without to force a point.

 

Every country picks and chooses what UN policies they follow, at least i think so. I don't think they have mandatory policies on anything, and even if they did no way to enforce them as we see time and time again.

That is exactly Trumps argument to trash the UN. But if he stopped for a minute to think, if the UN were ever supposed to have real power it would never work, just think the US states that never agree or comply with federal rules and laws, and even tried to secede, one can only image how that would work on a worldwide basis. It's supposed to be a forum to get countries to talk and get to agreements. 

The US should just get the opportunity to think why it's the only one after NN, after climate change. Or not.