Terminally Incoherent

You know, I have been thinking. How is lack of net neutrality going to affect things like page rank or online advertising? Let’s suppose I have a highly ranked site, and one day my host decides to stop paying AT&T the extortion money. This means that all the traffic to my site is not relayed via the Super Slow Pipe™.

Now if someone tries to reach my site on a high traffic day, may actually sit there and wait for long minutes. Allot of people may actually think my site is down if that performance continues. Consequently, they will take down the links to me from their websites. My page rank plummets!

What if one day googlebot can’t reach my website? I’m quite sure that most web spiders have some sort of timeout limit, after which they mark the site dead and move on. If I’m on the slow pipe (and believe me, most people will be) my load time might be too long for most spiders.

Same goes for advertising. Companies who use banners, or adsense may see a drop in the revenue from those sources. Websites that generated major revenue for them may one day be put on a slow pipe because of some deal between an ISP and a teleco. It doesn’t matter that google is paying off everyone. The site that carried the high earning adds may be to slow to use.

Lack of net neutrality will destroy the internet as we know it.

Please check out the Life After the Oil Crash website by Matt Savinar. Please repost this on your blog, forward it to your friends and show it to your relatives. It is crucial that people see this, and take it seriously.

We are on the brink of civilizational collapse. Within the next 10-20 years the oil production will peak, and start declining. Once the production falls more than 10% below demand, we can expect to see severe fuel shortages, similar to the big crash that happened in 70’s. And it will only get worse from there.

Oil shortage will cause gas prices to skyrocket, effectively shutting down transportation, and crippling our industry…

Technology sector will die. Computer science will cease to exist. All my skills knowledge and experience will be useless soon. I can only hope that the peak hits later than expected and I will be old and senile or dead by the time our current way of life becomes obsolete.

Update Sat, June 17 2006, 03:11 PM

Fixed some spelling, and one sentence that didn’t make any sense.

Can we finish one war before starting another one? We have War on Drugs, War on Terror and now War on Piracy. None of these “wars” has ever accomplished anything. Why? There is a reason for this.

What do those three have in common? Just stop and think about it for a second.

War on Drugs keeps the illegal drug prices high, so that certain groups of people can make high profit from trafficking and keep the cheep competition at bay.

War on Terror keeps the old prices high, pumps money into military contractors’ pockets, and allows certain groups of people to score huge governmental contracts.

War on Piracy keeps the prices of music and movies high, and allows certain groups of people to make big money by creating a draconian copyright hegemony, and stifling distribution of free and independent content.

These wars are not supposed to be won. They are supposed to allow certain interest groups to make big money by using taxpayer money to directly attack their competition.

This is yet another example a corrupt government throwing it’s political weight, and directly interfering with internal affairs of foreign nations to secure the profitability of US based corporations. At least with the two other “wars” we could claim the moral higher ground and pretend we are trying to stop global terrorism, or interfere drug trafficking. But war on piracy? We are essentially telling other countries to change their IP law because US just can’t compete with countries where copyright laws are fair and balanced.

I think it’s time we declare a new war. War on Corruption which will aim to crack down on the sell-out politicians, make corporate lobbying illegal and reform the way campaign donations and governmental contracts are handled.

Jack Thompson (aka The Biggest Douche of the Universe) is at it again.

This time Mr. Jack “I like to urinate on severed brain stems” Thompson attempted to discredit a well known Seattle philanthropist Michael Malone. Why would the Thompson openly attack a guy who serves as a chairman of the Seattle Police Foundation, and who used his own money to help equip SPD officers with new bulletproof vests and other safety equipment?

Apparently Mr. Malone, a businessman and entrepreneur is on the board of Take Two Interactive. Thompson thinks that this is unethical, as in his mind games are “cop murder simulators”. He claims that there is a conflict of interests there.

Yes, this makes as much sense as the plot of most of the Scary Movie sequels. It just does not add up. How would there be a conflict of interest? WTF? Someone needs to explain this to me because I don’t get it.

Thompson wants to destroy a guy who actively invests his free time and money to help the local police, because he is in some vague way associated with a video game company?

What’s even funnier is that Malone himself morally condemns GTA, and alluded that he tried to work from within to change this. Jack, Malone is one of your boys! He is on your team dude! This was a guy who would listen to your bullshit about video game violence and crime.

Good job. You just made yourself an enemy Jack. Who is going to support you in your crusade if you lash out against your own people?

Jack Thompson aka “The Biggest Douche in the Universe” is saying ridiculously stupid shit without thinking once again.

According to Jack “nobody shoots anybody in the face unless you’re a hit man or a video gamer.” I’m not kidding, this is an actual quote.

I have two words for you Jack: Dick Chaney.

How can anyone even think this way? Just about everyone I know played violent video games since childhood. And no one ever shot anyone in the face. Why do people listen to this guy?