Running your photo album on your home computer fine; I don't see why you would need to spread that over two computers. Http redirects should be able to help you out with that even.
Small businesses that need two separate computers as e-mail servers? Doesn't sound like a small business to me. Then your business has at least like 100 email users, and using a load balancer you can run it on a single IP address still. Anyway more reliable than hoping your incoming connections spread themselves over multiple IP addresses. And I can't think of any other servers they may possibly need two of. Even big sites like slashdot.org or google.com resolve to a single IP, yet they are run by a complete network of servers.
First of all I'm happy that not all my boxes are directly reachable from the outside world. Only those that I choose (DMZ or specific port forwarding). A simple quite effective security measure against many worms, for example. What's not addressable can't be infected that way.
Secondly if you're really trying to run web pages from home, and want your other computer to serve one too, why not putting that one on say port 8080? You won't be running any serious commercial web site from such a set-up anyway (assuming you're somewhat sane). And it's reachable from the outside again.
Same for your VCR and your water meter: assign them their own port numbers. No unique IP needed.
And yes of course it's convenient if everything is addressable from anywhere. The Stuxnet writers would have had an easier job if they could reach those PLCs directly instead of first having to infect another computer.
IPv4 is not broken yet. No, it's not, believe me. I'm still connecting to the Internet just fine. So it's not broken. That's enough reason not to fix it.
That may explain how they could find that planet in the first place too.
Normally it's either by "wobble" or by periodic dimming when a planet passes in front of a star.
To find Earth that way would take years of watching the Sun from far away. To find Jupiter that way would take way longer. 37 days is within "human time scales".
The furthest away from Earth a living human has ever been, is just behind the Moon (orbit around the moon), or about 1.3 light seconds. Indeed humans have some small craft flying around much further away in space, but no human on board there. And still a long way to go to reach 20 light years.
This is not about video rendering, this is about decryption, where the data happens to be an uncompressed video stream. And the problem with that again is that uncompressed video is a hell of a lot of data.
DRM must be really really costly. And the bad thing is we're all paying for it - the honest customers even more than the "pirates" against which it is supposed to protect.
When I see how much computing resources it takes just to en/decrypt a stream - OK it's a general purpose processor, not something dedicated - I am thinking of the cost of those resources in all the devices we have. After all your BluRay player has to read the BR disk, decrypt the content, then encrypt it again to an HDCP stream, which is sent over to say a TV, which then decrypts it again to make it a watchable image.
Now if only we wouldn't need that encryption.
BluRay itself is (all but) cracked, that's one decryption step that can be done away with.
HDCP transfer is now done with; that's another two steps of en- and decryption that can go.
That is at least three pieces of beefy hardware. That's three chips that won't come for a few pennies each. That's three chips that will be wasting significant amounts of energy.
Plus of course the huge upfront cost to develop all that: to develop the algorithms, set up the secure key supply, designing the dedicated de/encrypt chips and writing all the software around it to make it work.
And all of us are paying for it. It makes BR players and disks and HDCP compliant hardware more expensive than necessary, it even increases our power bills unnecessary. I really wonder when this madness can come to an end.
Your idea gives rise to highly arbitrary ticketing. Who decides you're going too fast? Too slow? It's becoming arbitrary. That's why we have those signs. Then it's clear to the motorist when they go too fast. And then there are situations that are not regulated - e.g. when it's misty, it's still legal to go 120 km/h on the motorway (or in Germany even faster), however everyone will agree it's a stupid thing to do, and if you are involved in an accident you've got big problems ahead after you recover from your injuries.
And if you don't like that speed tickets are such a great tax revenue, how about paying attention to the speed limit, and making sure you do not exceed it? It's that simple. Now if everyone does that I'm sure traffic accidents decrease drastically.
That the government loses some income is definitely offset by the less cost in medical care, police support at accident sites, tow truck, cleaning and repairs of roads/sidings damaged in accidents, etc.
So, even if the ISPs are following the law to the letter in this, I think selling customer data this way is wrong--massively wrong. This is a huge breach of customer trust, and for nothing but greed besides. The corporate model fails society yet again.
When the law requires the ISP to give those details they should do it. That's nothing to do with failure of the corporate model: the businesses are only doing what the government thinks they should do. So it's a governance issue that's at stake here.
From a previous/. story you may recall that the UK has pretty stringent laws on the disclosure of personal data. Basically no disclosure to third parties without court order.
As long as those ISPs follow the law regarding the disclosure of this personal data, I have nothing against it. Actually I would be all for it: let those rights holders pay up! After all they are losing so many billions in sales lost to piracy, that paying a few quid to get those evil pirates' names (and the rest of the population to go back to buying all those songs they are now sharing top-dollar on CD) should be no problem for them. And after all as we know it the record companies are always right in their accusations, suing only actual evil pirates, right?
Of course ISPs should only disclose personal data when the law requires them to do so. Potential profiting from non-compliance poses a danger of course. Oh well as long as the penalty for improper disclosure is high enough (preferably including throwing out court cases against alleged pirates) then they will.
You can get CFLs in two colour temperatures: daylight and warm white; the second being very close to the colour of traditional incandescents. They take a moment to heat up but considering most lights are on for longer than a few seconds that is not really an issue to me.
Waste disposal I totally agree with: that is a real issue. Where I live (Hong Kong) I have yet to find a way to properly dispose of this kind of chemical waste. Indeed I have resorted to just dumping them, together with batteries, in the trash as I really haven't found anywhere I can hand them in for proper disposal - not just the lights, general chemical waste. I have seen shops collecting rechargeable batteries for recycling, probably mainly because they are actually quite valuable as scrap.
I agree. One of the few incandescents that I have in use currently is the lamp for my turtle. The main purpose is actually heat for that one!
The only others that I still have in use are the ones in the staircase leading to my flat (using that for maybe two minutes a day, probably less), and a few connected to dimmers (those dimmers for CFLs are mighty expensive, so are dimmable CFLs).
I honestly believe that the future is in wireless streaming. Let's keep our streams clean and clear sounding, concentrate on programming, and when the inevitable coast-to-coast wireless coverage finally arrives, we'll already be positioned to survive.
WiFi is not very good for mobile applications. It's nice at home (so you can put your radio in the kitchen or in the bedroom like you do now), it's not going to work well when you're in the car. The current WiFi tech used has no way to hand you from station to station. When on the move you lose connection, have to find a new network, connect again.
Streaming data on the move is possible on mobile phone networks - and is possible already. The main thing holding this back is cost - I read on/. that many US providers already stop selling unlimited accounts, and that's what you need to make this work. Streaming data quickly adds up to lots and lots of data, and with a pay-as-you-go plan that's going to be very expensive, very fast. And those plans generally don't work when you move across the border, then suddenly your radio falls silent. While an FM receiver you carry across borders and just have to tune into another station and you can listen again.
There is a lot that has to change before broadcast radio (analog or digital) is going to disappear.
(it) succeeded in Europe and Australia (where a single standard was picked upfront).
That success must have been very relative. Maybe in other parts of Europe it was, not in The Netherlands. But until these comments I had never heard of the existence of AMS. And that while I've been quite interested in radio since the mid-1980s, have even volunteered for several years at a local (FM) radio station in the 1990s, and still never heard of the existence of such a technology.
The beauty of AM to me has always been the very very simple receivers it requires. Which of course was the whole idea behind it: keep the receivers cheap, the transmitters don't matter so much. AMS seems to negate all that. And by the way as you're talking about a late-1970s time for AMS to start; that's when FM-stereo was well entrenched already.
AM has it's uses, music broadcasts do not belong to it, and that's where stereo is the most important anyway. I suspect there are more reasons for AMS to have failed than just not settling down on a single standard.
Step 1 - Order a DS3 in a metro area (roughly $2k-3k)
Somehow I have the feeling that this is about more rural areas. Your DS3 may cost a lot more, depending on what cables happen to be nearby.
Step 4 - Rent tower space, depending on the area it could run $500-$10000. I'll guesstimate for a few antennas, probably $2000
Again if rural then putting those antennas on your rooftop seems an easier/cheaper option. At least you have your tower and equipment all nearby, and putting a 5-10m mast on your rooftop shouldn't be too hard to do safely. Even in a sprawling suburb that may be a good option. Depending on the required range (how far your neighbours are; how many you want to serve) a 2-3m tall steel tube attached to your chimney may simply do the job.
The big issue of "renting tower space" is that you need to have a tower that has space for rent nearby.
What irritates me most is that 1) they have a levy on empty media to pay for expected copyright infringement, and 2) they fine you when you actually use it for just that purpose.
Iirc there are some jurisdictions where this has been put straight (Canada?).
They left Hong Kong a few years ago already. Couldn't compete.
One of the main reasons: price. I was renting my movies for HK$5 (VCD)-$10 (DVD) a day (USD1=HKD7.8) from local independent rental shops, they were charging something like HK$20-30 a day and you had to buy like ten, twenty rental tickets in advance.
Older movies I routinely bought HK$50 for three (I don't care if it's made 1 or 20 years ago; haven't watched it; movies usually don't get better or worse with time). Never movies cost typically $50-90 each. If you buy DVD it's a little more. Mainland import stalls (that's where you get the not-yet-in-cinema stuff, well not all imported from mainland as local production is safer) charge around $20 for a DVD.
So I never missed them. They were too expensive, and had a Western-only library of movies, not very up-to-date even. The local shops had Western and Asian movies, better prices, better overall selection. And the independent outlets are going strong to this day in this city; albeit I'm not renting any more since having a child due to time restraints.
They need three strikes to disconnect a subscriber. Say on average three people sharing a connection (a typical household size, won't be much off for France), and assume every household has an Internet connection (that's a sure over-estimation of course), that makes just over 20 mln subscribers in France.
Now say all of them are involved in the regular illegal sharing of copyrighted material (another overestimation).
Three strikes means some 60 mln notices.
150k per (working) day, some 250 working days in a year, that means within two years time the complete ISP subscriber base has been warned three times and has been reported to the courts for further action.
So by the end of 2012, the complete French economy comes to a halt. The court system is fully overloaded, an dall ISPs are filing for bankruptcy for lack of any subscribers.
My previous ISP seemed to work that way indeed: just do a DHCP request through the cable modem, and I got my IP and was connected. This was a semi-fixed IP address, for months on end I would get the same address, so should be pretty easy for them to match an IP address to an actual connection, and with that subscriber. Basically until there was some network maintenance.
My current ISP I have to do PPPoE - that means send them un/pw combination to get an IP (but interestingly I can get at least two outside IPs on one connection) and Internet connection. Depending on their logging it should be much easier to determine which user an IP belongs to at a certain time. Even though my IP changes all the time.
Shouldn't the vet have called the person on the chip to notify them?
Yes I think the vet should - if the vet would have access to the personal data related to this chip.
IMHO this access to personal data shouldn't go further than "hey chipper co, I got dog with ID 1337 here, a Mr Leet claims to own that dog, is that correct?" upon which chipper co says "no we have a totally different name here! We'll notify the person registered with us.", or "yes, information matches our registration".
Yes that's a quite strict implementation of privacy. But it seems under the mentioned UK law it should be done like that.
Slashdot Mirror
Running your photo album on your home computer fine; I don't see why you would need to spread that over two computers. Http redirects should be able to help you out with that even.
Small businesses that need two separate computers as e-mail servers? Doesn't sound like a small business to me. Then your business has at least like 100 email users, and using a load balancer you can run it on a single IP address still. Anyway more reliable than hoping your incoming connections spread themselves over multiple IP addresses. And I can't think of any other servers they may possibly need two of. Even big sites like slashdot.org or google.com resolve to a single IP, yet they are run by a complete network of servers.
I don't agree with you. Multi don't.
First of all I'm happy that not all my boxes are directly reachable from the outside world. Only those that I choose (DMZ or specific port forwarding). A simple quite effective security measure against many worms, for example. What's not addressable can't be infected that way.
Secondly if you're really trying to run web pages from home, and want your other computer to serve one too, why not putting that one on say port 8080? You won't be running any serious commercial web site from such a set-up anyway (assuming you're somewhat sane). And it's reachable from the outside again.
Same for your VCR and your water meter: assign them their own port numbers. No unique IP needed.
And yes of course it's convenient if everything is addressable from anywhere. The Stuxnet writers would have had an easier job if they could reach those PLCs directly instead of first having to infect another computer.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
IPv4 is not broken yet. No, it's not, believe me. I'm still connecting to the Internet just fine. So it's not broken. That's enough reason not to fix it.
That may explain how they could find that planet in the first place too.
Normally it's either by "wobble" or by periodic dimming when a planet passes in front of a star.
To find Earth that way would take years of watching the Sun from far away. To find Jupiter that way would take way longer. 37 days is within "human time scales".
The furthest away from Earth a living human has ever been, is just behind the Moon (orbit around the moon), or about 1.3 light seconds. Indeed humans have some small craft flying around much further away in space, but no human on board there. And still a long way to go to reach 20 light years.
I feel for that Clevon.... there goes his chance to receive a Darwin award without having to die for it!
This is not about video rendering, this is about decryption, where the data happens to be an uncompressed video stream. And the problem with that again is that uncompressed video is a hell of a lot of data.
DRM must be really really costly. And the bad thing is we're all paying for it - the honest customers even more than the "pirates" against which it is supposed to protect.
When I see how much computing resources it takes just to en/decrypt a stream - OK it's a general purpose processor, not something dedicated - I am thinking of the cost of those resources in all the devices we have. After all your BluRay player has to read the BR disk, decrypt the content, then encrypt it again to an HDCP stream, which is sent over to say a TV, which then decrypts it again to make it a watchable image.
Now if only we wouldn't need that encryption.
BluRay itself is (all but) cracked, that's one decryption step that can be done away with.
HDCP transfer is now done with; that's another two steps of en- and decryption that can go.
That is at least three pieces of beefy hardware. That's three chips that won't come for a few pennies each. That's three chips that will be wasting significant amounts of energy.
Plus of course the huge upfront cost to develop all that: to develop the algorithms, set up the secure key supply, designing the dedicated de/encrypt chips and writing all the software around it to make it work.
And all of us are paying for it. It makes BR players and disks and HDCP compliant hardware more expensive than necessary, it even increases our power bills unnecessary. I really wonder when this madness can come to an end.
Your idea gives rise to highly arbitrary ticketing. Who decides you're going too fast? Too slow? It's becoming arbitrary. That's why we have those signs. Then it's clear to the motorist when they go too fast. And then there are situations that are not regulated - e.g. when it's misty, it's still legal to go 120 km/h on the motorway (or in Germany even faster), however everyone will agree it's a stupid thing to do, and if you are involved in an accident you've got big problems ahead after you recover from your injuries.
And if you don't like that speed tickets are such a great tax revenue, how about paying attention to the speed limit, and making sure you do not exceed it? It's that simple. Now if everyone does that I'm sure traffic accidents decrease drastically.
That the government loses some income is definitely offset by the less cost in medical care, police support at accident sites, tow truck, cleaning and repairs of roads/sidings damaged in accidents, etc.
So, even if the ISPs are following the law to the letter in this, I think selling customer data this way is wrong--massively wrong. This is a huge breach of customer trust, and for nothing but greed besides. The corporate model fails society yet again.
When the law requires the ISP to give those details they should do it. That's nothing to do with failure of the corporate model: the businesses are only doing what the government thinks they should do. So it's a governance issue that's at stake here.
From a previous /. story you may recall that the UK has pretty stringent laws on the disclosure of personal data. Basically no disclosure to third parties without court order.
As long as those ISPs follow the law regarding the disclosure of this personal data, I have nothing against it. Actually I would be all for it: let those rights holders pay up! After all they are losing so many billions in sales lost to piracy, that paying a few quid to get those evil pirates' names (and the rest of the population to go back to buying all those songs they are now sharing top-dollar on CD) should be no problem for them. And after all as we know it the record companies are always right in their accusations, suing only actual evil pirates, right?
Of course ISPs should only disclose personal data when the law requires them to do so. Potential profiting from non-compliance poses a danger of course. Oh well as long as the penalty for improper disclosure is high enough (preferably including throwing out court cases against alleged pirates) then they will.
You can get CFLs in two colour temperatures: daylight and warm white; the second being very close to the colour of traditional incandescents. They take a moment to heat up but considering most lights are on for longer than a few seconds that is not really an issue to me.
Waste disposal I totally agree with: that is a real issue. Where I live (Hong Kong) I have yet to find a way to properly dispose of this kind of chemical waste. Indeed I have resorted to just dumping them, together with batteries, in the trash as I really haven't found anywhere I can hand them in for proper disposal - not just the lights, general chemical waste. I have seen shops collecting rechargeable batteries for recycling, probably mainly because they are actually quite valuable as scrap.
I agree. One of the few incandescents that I have in use currently is the lamp for my turtle. The main purpose is actually heat for that one!
The only others that I still have in use are the ones in the staircase leading to my flat (using that for maybe two minutes a day, probably less), and a few connected to dimmers (those dimmers for CFLs are mighty expensive, so are dimmable CFLs).
I honestly believe that the future is in wireless streaming. Let's keep our streams clean and clear sounding, concentrate on programming, and when the inevitable coast-to-coast wireless coverage finally arrives, we'll already be positioned to survive.
WiFi is not very good for mobile applications. It's nice at home (so you can put your radio in the kitchen or in the bedroom like you do now), it's not going to work well when you're in the car. The current WiFi tech used has no way to hand you from station to station. When on the move you lose connection, have to find a new network, connect again.
Streaming data on the move is possible on mobile phone networks - and is possible already. The main thing holding this back is cost - I read on /. that many US providers already stop selling unlimited accounts, and that's what you need to make this work. Streaming data quickly adds up to lots and lots of data, and with a pay-as-you-go plan that's going to be very expensive, very fast. And those plans generally don't work when you move across the border, then suddenly your radio falls silent. While an FM receiver you carry across borders and just have to tune into another station and you can listen again.
There is a lot that has to change before broadcast radio (analog or digital) is going to disappear.
another AM Stereo debacle
(it) succeeded in Europe and Australia (where a single standard was picked upfront).
That success must have been very relative. Maybe in other parts of Europe it was, not in The Netherlands. But until these comments I had never heard of the existence of AMS. And that while I've been quite interested in radio since the mid-1980s, have even volunteered for several years at a local (FM) radio station in the 1990s, and still never heard of the existence of such a technology.
The beauty of AM to me has always been the very very simple receivers it requires. Which of course was the whole idea behind it: keep the receivers cheap, the transmitters don't matter so much. AMS seems to negate all that. And by the way as you're talking about a late-1970s time for AMS to start; that's when FM-stereo was well entrenched already.
AM has it's uses, music broadcasts do not belong to it, and that's where stereo is the most important anyway. I suspect there are more reasons for AMS to have failed than just not settling down on a single standard.
No consequences for filing false notices?
Step 1 - Order a DS3 in a metro area (roughly $2k-3k)
Somehow I have the feeling that this is about more rural areas. Your DS3 may cost a lot more, depending on what cables happen to be nearby.
Step 4 - Rent tower space, depending on the area it could run $500-$10000. I'll guesstimate for a few antennas, probably $2000
Again if rural then putting those antennas on your rooftop seems an easier/cheaper option. At least you have your tower and equipment all nearby, and putting a 5-10m mast on your rooftop shouldn't be too hard to do safely. Even in a sprawling suburb that may be a good option. Depending on the required range (how far your neighbours are; how many you want to serve) a 2-3m tall steel tube attached to your chimney may simply do the job.
The big issue of "renting tower space" is that you need to have a tower that has space for rent nearby.
What irritates me most is that 1) they have a levy on empty media to pay for expected copyright infringement, and 2) they fine you when you actually use it for just that purpose.
Iirc there are some jurisdictions where this has been put straight (Canada?).
Here they closed all three local stores leaving over 100,000 people without a local Blockbuster.
You trying to say there are no competitors to them whatsoever? Or is having a local Blockbuster considered a normal fact of life or so?
They left Hong Kong a few years ago already. Couldn't compete.
One of the main reasons: price. I was renting my movies for HK$5 (VCD)-$10 (DVD) a day (USD1=HKD7.8) from local independent rental shops, they were charging something like HK$20-30 a day and you had to buy like ten, twenty rental tickets in advance.
Older movies I routinely bought HK$50 for three (I don't care if it's made 1 or 20 years ago; haven't watched it; movies usually don't get better or worse with time). Never movies cost typically $50-90 each. If you buy DVD it's a little more. Mainland import stalls (that's where you get the not-yet-in-cinema stuff, well not all imported from mainland as local production is safer) charge around $20 for a DVD.
So I never missed them. They were too expensive, and had a Western-only library of movies, not very up-to-date even. The local shops had Western and Asian movies, better prices, better overall selection. And the independent outlets are going strong to this day in this city; albeit I'm not renting any more since having a child due to time restraints.
Don't hold your breath, I don't think the French are stupid enough to actually let it come that far. But then, you never know...
No you see it wrong.
They need three strikes to disconnect a subscriber. Say on average three people sharing a connection (a typical household size, won't be much off for France), and assume every household has an Internet connection (that's a sure over-estimation of course), that makes just over 20 mln subscribers in France.
Now say all of them are involved in the regular illegal sharing of copyrighted material (another overestimation).
Three strikes means some 60 mln notices.
150k per (working) day, some 250 working days in a year, that means within two years time the complete ISP subscriber base has been warned three times and has been reported to the courts for further action.
So by the end of 2012, the complete French economy comes to a halt. The court system is fully overloaded, an dall ISPs are filing for bankruptcy for lack of any subscribers.
Now that would be fun.
It will depend on your total configuration.
My previous ISP seemed to work that way indeed: just do a DHCP request through the cable modem, and I got my IP and was connected. This was a semi-fixed IP address, for months on end I would get the same address, so should be pretty easy for them to match an IP address to an actual connection, and with that subscriber. Basically until there was some network maintenance.
My current ISP I have to do PPPoE - that means send them un/pw combination to get an IP (but interestingly I can get at least two outside IPs on one connection) and Internet connection. Depending on their logging it should be much easier to determine which user an IP belongs to at a certain time. Even though my IP changes all the time.
Shouldn't the vet have called the person on the chip to notify them?
Yes I think the vet should - if the vet would have access to the personal data related to this chip.
IMHO this access to personal data shouldn't go further than "hey chipper co, I got dog with ID 1337 here, a Mr Leet claims to own that dog, is that correct?" upon which chipper co says "no we have a totally different name here! We'll notify the person registered with us.", or "yes, information matches our registration".
Yes that's a quite strict implementation of privacy. But it seems under the mentioned UK law it should be done like that.