Slashdot Mirror

Then we'd be reading a story about how some spoiled rich brat was suing because the mean ol' FCC wouldn't approve his nifty idea.

Errrm.... Falcone's investors seem to think that is exactly what we are reading about.

Harbinger investors sue Falcone, Harbinger fund

Exactly. What people here don't realize is carrier profit per customer ... which is of course the maximum amount they could drop your bill without significantly cutting your service.

(numbers from http://www.totaltele.com/view.aspx?ID=466491 )

Avg. revenue per user $54.12 (/month)
Number of users 70 million
Verizon profit per month 2.37/12 * 1000 million = 197.5

Profit margin per customer per month : $2.82.

This is the same as with people complaining about gas price and "record profits" for the oil companies. Those boil down to about $0.3/gallon. That's a record high.

That's not a link. That's a URL. A link looks like this: Spanish company wins tablet patent case against Apple

And guess what? They all do that, they all have peering arrangements with each other for call completion.

Hilariously, Google Voice has already been caught blocking calls to certain rural call centers because they discovered they didn't like the exchange contracts anymore. The rest of the major Telcos are whining to mama government to get the rural exchanges to stop. http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/189820/rural_carrier_traffic_pumping_isnt_easy_issue.html

But guess what, the internet has the exact same peering agreements.

Just like the phone companies, the ISPs are crying about the contracts they signed. I pay ISP A for internet access, Amazon pays ISP B for internet access, and ISP A and B have an agreement to pay each other for the traffic they send either way (possibly with ISP C, D, and E somewhere in the middle). Now, ISP A whines that they're not getting enough money. Rather than charging me more, or charging ISP B more, they're claiming that they deserve to be able to charge Amazon for "using their network" despite their existing peering contract. They figure that if they just train their tech support to pretend that the problem is at the other end, they can extort Amazon into agreeing by simply dropping their traffic or redirecting it to a site that will pay. Same goes for other companies: voice over IP or IPTV that competes with their services or that they just don't want to pay their peers for? They'll drop that too, or just mess with it enough that its unusable. Sandvine and Comcast proves this is not a hypothetical. The fact that they were eventually caught just means they'll try harder next time.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1599659/wall-street-journal-admits-ipad-sales-disappointing

http://www.itnewsafrica.com/?p=6709

http://www.thetechherald.com/article.php/201014/5463/First-day-iPad-sales-fall-short-of-revised-expectations

http://www.totaltele.com/view.aspx?ID=454448

Wow. Four stories about how Apple didn't sell as many iPads as some analysts (not Apple) predicted!

2 million, 2 months. Fastest ever to $1 billion. But some analysts were off by a week or so (in light of a supply shortage, no less), oh no!

keep reading ...

http://www.smartcompany.com.au/information-technology/20100604-the-ipad-can-t-match-the-laptop-yet-but-when-it-can-the-world-will-change-kohler.html

http://www.zdnet.com.au/why-the-apple-ipad-will-fail-in-australia-339302686.htm

http://www.itwire.com/it-industry-news/strategy/38566-five-reasons-the-ipad-will-fail-in-australia

http://delimiter.com.au/2010/04/27/five-reasons-the-ipad-will-fail-in-australia/

http://www.marketingmag.com.au/news/view/ipad-over-hyped-2165

Three identical articles! And two opinions that match yours! Oh my, Apple is doomed!

2 million, 2 months, fastest to $1 billion, top selling tablet, etc., etc. You can quote all the bullshit articles you want, but you can't negate the simple fact that the iPad is off to a stellar start. You can't take the position that with a start like this, the iPad is going to fall flat and expect to be taken seriously. If it is going fail, there are no signs of it. In fact, all signs point to the opposite conclusion.

I'll repeat that: there are no signs at all that the iPad will fail. Just because you don't like it, that doesn't mean...

Fuck, I just realized, nobody can be that stupid. I've been trolled. I need to learn to pay better attention next time.

/end thread

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1599659/wall-street-journal-admits-ipad-sales-disappointing

http://www.itnewsafrica.com/?p=6709

http://www.thetechherald.com/article.php/201014/5463/First-day-iPad-sales-fall-short-of-revised-expectations

http://www.totaltele.com/view.aspx?ID=454448

keep reading ...

http://www.smartcompany.com.au/information-technology/20100604-the-ipad-can-t-match-the-laptop-yet-but-when-it-can-the-world-will-change-kohler.html

http://www.zdnet.com.au/why-the-apple-ipad-will-fail-in-australia-339302686.htm

http://www.itwire.com/it-industry-news/strategy/38566-five-reasons-the-ipad-will-fail-in-australia

http://delimiter.com.au/2010/04/27/five-reasons-the-ipad-will-fail-in-australia/

http://www.marketingmag.com.au/news/view/ipad-over-hyped-2165

... That Berlusconi, beside being the president of that country, is too the manager of almost every TV stations in Italy (Mediaset).
I live in Switzerland, and I cannot find it again, but I read some weeks ago that a law was to be enforced to regulate the viewing of on demand video.

The article was relating the big amount of money that where being put into a on-demand video platform for mediaset at the same time, and how youtube was the first competitor to put aside.
http://www.totaltele.com/view.aspx?ID=450891
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Berlusconi-s-Government-Plans-to-Severely-Restrict-Online-Video-in-Italy-132350.shtml

Given the fact that Berlusconi says all the time that "The bad journalists are attacking me without reasons all the time" http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/10/15/f-berlusconi-saga.html, and how he consider that the fist in face he received some times ago was "organized and planed via facebook" http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=alDDK9lGqxtY I am not that surprised of that move.
After all, he passed a law giving him immunity in every lawsuit for corruption that where opened against him when he came back to the government.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/18/silvio-berlusconi-immunity-prosecution

Answer the questions, quit avoiding them (they're bolded, not quoted, & end in question marks - ok? That ought to be simple enough for the likes of yourself):

Are you telling us that a javascript exploit via a webbrowser in its default launch configuration is "immune" to javascript exploits on MacOS X? Alternately, what about scriptable documents, such as Adobe Reader can do (iirc, even on MacOS X it can & this too, has been exploited both locally AND remotely)?

Answer THAT, please...

(LOL! Man, rhia ought to be about as good as your saying "MacOS X has NEVER BEEN PATCHED" & now? You have to admit it has been, after the JAVA patch Apple FINALLY issued yesterday clearly illustrated for us all to see (to see that you are nothing more than a zealot who cannot see reason, or that you are ignorant)... lmao!)

----

"A single Java flaw that took months to patch with no actual threat in the wild" - by RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) on Wednesday June 17, @02:33PM (#28364331)

Again, simple: As I have said earlier here repeatedly - Your OS & other *NIX's are hidden by "security by obscurity"... & I am NOT the only pro in this field that holds that viewpoint, see the quote below:

I.E.-> Not enough folks use it, to make it worthwhile for hacker/cracker types to target (certainly NOT by comparison to the market share of Windows, which dwarves all of *NIX-dom combined in fact, & certainly on the most used hardware platform there is, in x86) for it to be a target of malware makers/hacker-cracker types... AND? I am not the only person who holds that view either - take a read:

http://www.totaltele.com/view.aspx?ID=446406&Page=0

(In regard to the slashdot article entitled "The next Ad you click may be a virus", it is its source, here, from yesterday -> http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/06/15/2056219 )

----

"Hackers are like any other criminal out there. They look for opportunities where there is the largest number of people gathered, because they will get the best return on their efforts," says Hemanshu Nigam, who oversees safety, security and privacy for News Corp.'s online properties, including MySpace. News Corp. also owns Dow Jones, publisher of The Wall Street Journal"

----

AND? Most folks are "gathered" on Windows usage, worldwide, period!

So - IF the "year of the (insert *NIX variant here) desktop" ever happens (hasn't yet, though I have been hearing THAT diatribe propoganda for nearly 15 yrs. now & it never happens)?

Then, you'll see THAT *NIX get "hit" just as much as Windows does (perhaps more, because of the arrogance of people like yourself that think you need no protective measures online (funny though, that even *NIX servers ride behind firewalls don't they?))...

That all "said & aside", by someone other than myself no less who was quoted in said article? This is a reply to your obvious lack of know-how in your reply:

"Being a dedicated Windows user for about 10 to 15 years has gotten me to really think for myself. I thought, "Maybe I want a machine that isn't going to die just from browsing the web." Then I got a Mac. - by RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) on Wednesday June 17, @04:02PM (#28365501)

You "thought"? That's a first... AND?? You didn't "think" enough... others who used what my guide entails in its points think, and SEE, quite differently:

Again -> http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=ae352cd32542fe49a55fe00b11086449&t=28430&page=3

----

"Its 2009 - still trouble free! I was told last week by a co worker who does active directory administration, and he said I was doing o

Are you telling us that a javascript exploit via a webbrowser in its default launch configuration is "immune" to javascript exploits on MacOS X? Alternately, what about scriptable documents, such as Adobe Reader can do (iirc, even on MacOS X it can & this too, has been exploited both locally AND remotely)?

Answer THAT, please...

(LOL! Man, rhia ought to be about as good as your saying "MacOS X has NEVER BEEN PATCHED" & now? You have to admit it has been... lmao!)

AND?

Yes, you ARE displaying arrogance - nearly the entire time here, in making it seem as if MacOS X & other *NIX's are "impenetrable" & without flaws seeminly!

(Arrogance, as well as hubris, because when I started this I only showed you in error about Netbios/LanMan networking being EASILY secured by users via cutting off a single server, the SERVER service, which you didn't like & then started tossing profanities & other silly 'putdowns' my way like a frustrated child would).

----

"A single Java flaw that took months to patch with no actual threat in the wild" - by RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) on Wednesday June 17, @02:33PM (#28364331)

Again, simple: As I have said earlier here repeatedly? Your OS & other *NIX's are hidden by "security by obscurity"...

I.E.-> Not enough folks use it, to make it worthwhile for hacker/cracker types to target (certainly NOT by comparison to the market share of Windows, which dwarves all of *NIX-dom combined in fact, & certainly on the most used hardware platform there is, in x86) for it to be a target of malware makers/hacker-cracker types... AND? I am not the only person who holds that view either - take a read:

http://www.totaltele.com/view.aspx?ID=446406&Page=0

(In regard to the slashdot article entitled "The next Ad you click may be a virus", it is its source, here, from yesterday -> http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/06/15/2056219 )

----

"Hackers are like any other criminal out there. They look for opportunities where there is the largest number of people gathered, because they will get the best return on their efforts," says Hemanshu Nigam, who oversees safety, security and privacy for News Corp.'s online properties, including MySpace. News Corp. also owns Dow Jones, publisher of The Wall Street Journal"

----

AND? Most folks are "gathered" on Windows usage, worldwide, period

So - IF the "year of the (insert *NIX variant here) desktop" ever happens (hasn't yet, though I have been hearing THAT diatribe propoganda for nearly 15 yrs. now & it never happens)?

Then, you'll see THAT *NIX get "hit" just as much as Windows does (perhaps more, because of the arrogance of people like yourself that think you need no protective measures online (funny though, that even *NIX servers ride behind firewalls don't they?))...

That all "said & aside", by someone other than myself no less who was quoted in said article?

Heh, my man, face it: You don't possess the intellect to get the better of me, nor the information necessary either... plus, as you can see? Others, who are pros in this field like myself, agree with my viewpoint also!

----

"GTFO." by RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) on Wednesday June 17, @02:33PM (#28364331)

LOL, grow up, & get this simple point thru your head, ok? You do NOT own this website, nor are you even a modeator here... so ordering me around? LOL, waste of time, you don't have the clout for it (or the ability to 'get the better of me', period) & anyone is free to read this exchange & see the numerous errors you made throughout it, vs. the points & evidences I put out vs. your "straight outta pravda" propoganda.

When you learn to THINK FOR YOURSELF one day, hopefully? You'll choose your words, & opponents, more car

WiMAX has a theoretical bandwidth (warning: pdf, see pg 5) of about 4.5Mbps per 3.5Mhz channel (outdoors, range 15km)... so it will probably mean they utilize approximately 7 channels (= 31.5Mbps). Having 32Mbps per user would be an insane amount of bandwidth and channel usage. Of course it all depends on the details which are not provided...

Perhaps this is behind another interesting development, AT&T seem to be going down the GSM route to 3G according to this article in Communications Week (Registration required) Here is a summary for those who can't get there:

AT&T's decision to build out quickly a GSM overlay network on top of its existing network of time division multiple access (TDMA) basestations has swung the balance of competing wireless technologies in North America.

The decision by the third biggest cellular service provider in the United States - with 15 million subscribers - to adopt GSM systems after all as the platform for developing third generation high-speed mobile data, has fired industry analysts with expectation that the European-backed standard could now become a leader in the U.S. market.