If you can, please help. I’m in a bad situation. Thank you for understanding, and tune in tomorrow for another new daily action figure post.
Parents Supporting Their LGBT Kids During Pride Month.
Let me tell you all a (true) story. The woman holding the sign that says “I adore my lesbian daughters” is named Frances Golden. In 1970, after seeing New York’s first Gay Pride parade, both her daughters came out to her. Frances started attending Pride events soon after. Now over 90 years old, she continues to go to LGBT Pride parades around the country holding the very same sign from years ago. https://www.buzzfeed.com/skarlan/who-is-she?utm_term=.nr630X1Xq3#.qmeMlD2D1M
what no net neutrality will probably *actually* look like
You’ve probably seen something like this before:
a graphic supposed to show “a world without net neutrality” where they make it look like a cable plan. Whether people kept pushing this because they thought it was easier to explain or this was a long-run anti-net neutrality ploy so that people won’t know what to really look for, I’m not sure, but either way it’s inaccurate.
(You might be thinking “Hey now, but I thought Portugal already had plans just like that!” because you have seen this:
These are actually slightly different than you’ve been led to believe. There was a monthly data plan that covered all web usage for a certain amount of data, BUT paying extra a month for websites and apps you use a lot means they won’t count against your data cap. We’ll get into that later.)
When I say it’s inaccurate, this doesn’t mean the companies CAN’T do this, it means they WON’T. Why not? Take a look at the sites up there. Barring outdated sites (jesus when was this made??? myspace??? msn??? who made this one???) They’re all extremely popular websites with a bunch of money. Do you really think that this whole time the plan was to kill big companies by barring them from half the population? No.
So what would be more likely?
Probably something like this, except I’m just guessing at the numbers here, and this would be paid multiple times if multiple ISPs adopt this setup. Point is, users won’t be forced to pay per website for slower speeds, but the websites will. Anyone remember Netflix in 2014?
Yeah. Comcast and Verizon said “Streaming Netflix takes up so much of our resources… we’re going to slow down their speeds until they pay us to keep their customers happy.” And it worked.
So now that Net Neutrality rules are gone again, that can start back up. And for larger websites, they can manage. They can afford to pay. But your startups and small businesses can’t, and without paying they can’t grow. They want to “fix” this loophole where the internet makes it moderately easier to start and grow your own business, find an audience, and become successful. Back to square one.
Oh yeah, and they could block certain news stories they don’t like. So there’s that.
I end with a brief foray into zero-rating, because you might think something like this looks nice (besides the violent color scheme that probably makes you internally cringe and want to look away):
This is from T-Mobile. It’s a data plan where certain apps don’t count towards your monthly data limit.
Like the Portugal plans?
Pretty much like those, but without extra money thrown in.
Wait, that’s been an offer from T-Mobile for a while, right? So we’ve had these even when net neutrality rules were in effect?
Exactly. Zero-rating virtually does the same things the loss of net neutrality does: allows ISPs to choose what succeeds and what consumers will use. Despite this, it has never been against the law. The most it has gotten from the FCC was *vague mumbling* “we’ll look into it case-by-case.” And if we’re being honest, most of Title II for broadband providers was not as useful as it should be, since any time the FCC investigated a company possibly breaking the rules, it ended in *shrug* “Eh why not?”
Now, you might still think these deals sound nice. “So what? They’re already popular sites, they’re what I’m going to use most, it’ll be nice if they don’t count against me. It’s convenient for the customer and cheaper than unlimited plans.”
They do look pretty at first. Unlimited music and Netflix?? Hell yeah! But what these plans do is kill actual Unlimited Data plans. When’s the last time you’ve seen one for a decent price? It’s much easier for the companies to deliver just about the same amount of data while also being able to control what websites you use it on and who you give money to.
So yeah, tl;dr: a lot of posts told you this would be bad for popular social sites bc you’d have to pay extra. those guys are gonna be fine (except maybe wikipedia, they might be forced to give up their ad-free appeal) and they aren’t the victims here. it’s gonna hurt small businesses, and you might not see it if you don’t know where to look. hell, you might even think some of the plans getting offered sound nice. don’t be fooled.
I’ll take “how I knew I was a homosexual as a child” for $400, Alex
Gay culture is Chris O'Donnell as Robin in the Batman movies
Y'all are tryna be funny but this is real life.
Don’t forget the close up pecs, crotch, and ass shots. I still don’t see any heterosexual reasons for this.
Re blogging for the added last gif. This is so true you guys. I knew I was too into Robin as a kid.
Haha! Yep, same here. I knew I was way into those butt shots to be straight.
Joel Schumacher, who directed both “Batman Foever” and “Batman & Robin,” has been openly Gay throughout his career.
Here it is, the sexiest thing I could think of dressing up as for Halloween.
Where is the male version of this
I DON’T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION
It’s come full circle. Someone has made a sexy Halloween costume costume. 🎃