• 1 Post
  • 105 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 1st, 2023

help-circle





  • Yes but that isn’t changed by the amount of data used. There is no cost to supply per kb supplied, only a cost to maintain the equipment that governs the speed of the connection.

    Here’s an analog example. If the city you lived in started charging you more for the water to come into your house faster as well as charging you for the amount of water you use. Obviously you should pay for the amount of a finite resource you use but the speed at which you acquired that resource should be limited only by the physics of the water transportation system.

    Data on the other hand, is not a finite resource. There is no limit to the amount of data one can acquire given endless time and energy. So the only way to bill for that becomes the speed at which you acquire the data. You pay for the data speed and that funds the infrastructure to supply that speed indefinitely. End of story. The only reason data caps exist is that they want to charge more money for you to use less bandwidth so they can sell that bandwidth to other people. When what should really happen is, they should invest in higher bandwidth capacity and sell that to their customers to return on that investment.

    Either supply me infinite speed and bill me for the amount of data used or supply me infinite data and bill me for the bandwidth. Not both.


  • Jyek@sh.itjust.workstomemes@lemmy.worldBeep beep
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    21 days ago

    3 seconds when under 65. 5 seconds when it’s raining or I’m moving faster than posted highway speeds. It pisses people off but I’m hauling a ton of steel and plastic around, I’m not going to risk my life and everyone’s around me just because some guy is late for work or can’t be patient and needs to get where he’s going a few seconds before me. People tend to lose the reality of the situation when driving their super fast metal explosion machines.










  • But then you have the issue of voter retaliation and discrimination. That already happens in certain places in this country if someone even thinks you vote a certain way. If there was a reliable way to find out who someone else voted for in the most recent election, there would be huge social implications.

    What if you lose a job because of the way you voted? An employer would not have to disclose that as the reason or any reason at all. Most states are employ at will states where you can be hired or fired for any reason at all with a handful of exceptions. And even with those exceptions, it is very very difficult to prove if those exceptions have been broken.




  • That’s awesome for Brazil. They discovered a perfect flawless man made system. I completely believe it is entirely tamper proof. It’s much easier to change whole datasets than to edit enough paper ballots to make a difference in a vote where many millions of people have submitted paper votes. Ctrl+a, del… Goodbye data. Not that it’s possible to do in the Brazilian system. But it certainly is possible in many databases…


  • Then why don’t you create that system?

    And then proceed to convince every American that it is good and reliable and will work because it only takes a vocal few to stir question about it. And it only takes a single person finding a small flaw that can probably skew results. And that one flaw that allows someone smarter than you or I, has the power to throw question into our already shaky political system. And you as the producer of the system are entirely liable.

    We are already fighting about trust in our voting system, to add the complexity of computerized systems is not going to sway the vast majority of people.

    You can’t ‘miscount’ a digital vote.

    Yes you absolutely can. Look up flipped bits, look up rounding errors. Look up lossy data. Look up bit overflow. There are many many ways computers miscount things. Hell, many calculators have incongruent output to each other because they do math in a slightly different system.