<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for sapereaude</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/sapereaude/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/sapereaude/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2011 17:17:27 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Kit-A-Day Giveaway &amp;#8211; Solder: Time Watch</title><link>http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2011/12/kit-a-day-giveaway-solder-time-watch.html#comment-381540358</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I love Watches!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">sapereaude</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2011 17:17:27 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Ask Engadget: best alternative to a cable company-issued set-top box?</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/02/ask-engadget-best-alternative-to-a-cable-company-issued-set-top/#comment-106249904</link><description>&lt;p&gt;He just said he uses Linux and doesn't have a windows PC, I'd imagine  he probably built his computer(s) so he would not have received a license for either vista or 7. Not to mention the waste of running a computer he wouldn't use just to supply an Xbox he'd have to buy...&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">sapereaude</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 2010 00:44:20 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Apple's Q4 earnings are out, records set for revenue, earnings, and sales (Update: earnings call liveblog!)</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/18/apples-q4-earnings-are-out-records-set-for-revenue-earnings/#comment-88020938</link><description>&lt;p&gt;The Apple earnings report bingo card: Android Fragmentation vs Integration&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">sapereaude</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:41:02 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What the web COULD look like without Net Neutrality</title><link>http://www.socialsquared.com/2009/10/28/what-the-web-could-look-like-without-net-neutrality/#comment-44356691</link><description>&lt;p&gt;What the heck? Are you people slow? Net Neutrality wouldn't let the government "regulate" the internet, the purpose is to prevent the ISPs from giving traffic priority on the networks.  For example, without net neutrality comcast could decide to throttle all VOIPs except their own so you either have to pay for theirs or pay extra to use vonage with reasonable quality.  Or maybe Fox wants to 'sponsor' your connection so &lt;a href="http://Fox.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="Fox.com"&gt;Fox.com&lt;/a&gt; loads at normal speed but CNN is so slow it would be faster to use dialup.  Comcast already does this with Bittorrent Traffic despite the many legitimate uses for it. More recently they have been doing this with all uploads, making it virtually impossible to say upload a video to Youtube.  Within the past week or so the FCC lost its court case against them for this practice.  The court ruled the FCC's net neutrality policies outside of their mandate so there is in fact no longer anything stopping the ISPs from implementing a policy like this or even from completely blocking access to any sites they want to.  How long to you think it will take for them to start making their competitor's websites antagonizingly slow?  Net Neutrality is not about starting Government censorship its about stopping corporate censorship.    &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">sapereaude</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 11 Apr 2010 16:01:26 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Would You Pick Up A $1 Bill? What About $120K?</title><link>https://www.mybanktracker.com/news/2009/09/15/would-you-pick-up-a-1-bill-what-about-120k/#comment-16855837</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Sorry if my previous comment came across a bit mean, your prompt correction has certainly changed my outlook of your website, I just stumbled on the article and noticed the wrong numbers, so much of the stuff on the internet is just thrown up and left regardless of known errors that it contains, I made a snap judgment, based on one article, which turned out to be wrong and for that I apologize. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">sapereaude</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 23:13:44 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Would You Pick Up A $1 Bill? What About $120K?</title><link>https://www.mybanktracker.com/news/2009/09/15/would-you-pick-up-a-1-bill-what-about-120k/#comment-16681575</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Umm Nice but your data is out of date, a quick trip to &lt;a href="http://forbes.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="forbes.com"&gt;forbes.com&lt;/a&gt; shows that Warren Buffet is only worth $37 bill, not 62 bill and Bill Gates is only worth 40, not 58, he is however now the worlds richest man...  (sorry but you are a financial website and the article was published today, those numbers have been out since March)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">sapereaude</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 18:59:21 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>