Maybe Java isn't that bad a language after all. It would solve a lot of security issues (not all) and memory issues (again, not all of them). It also could solve quite a few concurrency issues (new tab really should be new thread).
Of course, it would create its own set of problems but pointing them out does not a flamewar make:-)
Unfortunately advertising "5Mbit/s IP-TV" connection sounds worse than "8/1", so I doubt your idea is sellable. It could, but I doubt. I've been wrong before:-)
Pure capitalism is the idea of selling stuff (bandwidth in this case) to the highest bidder - clearly against net neutrality. "Free market" has, in principle, no laws/rules against collusions. You are asking government to make a law ("plan") to limit companies from doing "pure capitalism", you could almost say it is kinda socialism. Not that it is bad in itself. Whether it is good in net neutrality issue will be seen (if the law passes).
I was only referring that net neutrality cannot work (unless there is so much bandwidth that QoS is not needed). The reference to communism was just a joke.
BTW, you mix socialism (central government) and communism (none or limited government and no real "economy" as there is no money). Mixing telcos with communism makes no sense. Not that this is important...
This is NOT the way things are meant to work. This is the way Microsoft[1] meant things to "work". F/OSS should have higher standards. I wholly agree though that they don't.
[1] More and more F/OSS fanboys are singing the same song: "There is no security problem unless there is a virus on the wild".
I have the feeling that Linux security is going down. I got the feeling about 5 years ago. It probably has been going down for maybe 10 years. I see no end to it, quite contrary.
The reason? You nailed it. Nobody gives a damn when an essential Linux library has huge security hole.
It still would make sense to "max-out" (use as much as possible) VoIP for p2p. Not good.
The limit cannot be below 384kbit/s (low res. video calls). Just make 2-3 "conversation calls" - I am certain people here would complain if you cannot make such a trivial setup without ISP rate limiting you. Right?
Anyway IP-TV is a better example. It most likely will be paid service and therefore people will expect it to work "better" than for e.g. http or neighbors p2p.
It cannot work (better), unless the IP-TV company has better service. That is, the IP-TV company can set QoS parameters which you cannot (ISP routers drops yours immediately).
Net neutrality as a concept is as workable as communism: if people would be happy to get *only* "their share" it could work. Of course it will not happen.
I can prove my point. Check WiFi ISP's. In some areas in USA they do not apparently work properly, unless you use illegal power amplifier/antenna in your access point. You see, there are enough "nice" people using them so unless you are lucky you get a connection which sucks.
There is a huge problem. If e.g. VoIP works "better" than, say bittorrent, the next p2p *will* use VoIP[1] for faster downloads. Software writers and users are willing to game the system (use incorrect QoS settings etc) in order to improve their data rate on the expense of everybody else.
Good old same from Microsoft: "No sense to buy Mac now as we already have preview now and 'soon' the final will be out. And this time we get it right - see the amount of changes!".
Concentrating on mistakes made by any vendor is counter productive. So long as the vendor responds and fixes the problem and takes a responsible attitude, they're doing fine by me. I had this attitude towards Microsoft maybe 15 years ago. I no longer do.
Well, they never took "responsible attitude", but the number of "mistakes" on Microsofts behalf is mind numbing. Especially as they should have known better. ActiveX is such an horrible POS I cannot understand why MS did not kill it. Well, actually, I do: they do not give a shit if it sells.
They still belittle security problems. I do not believe they still design security in mind. How on earth can I not concentrate on the mistakes? I am not superhuman, if there is serious mistake exposed every f*g week for years and years it will eventually get into my brains.
BTW, Linux is getting worse, not better. It was good 10 years ago. Now it is passable. I fear in 5 years it will deteriorate even more. Designers are not "concentrating on the mistakes", you see. I hope my fears are not "fulfilled".
nsert an easy one to find, so we miss the others...now that's smart 'n' sharp No, that is stupid. After this "easy to find" nobody in his right mind is not going to trust *any* elliptic curve system from NSA.
Though I doubt many did even before. The mathematics are not entirely new, some other elliptic curve systems have similar properties (if you can pick the parameters you can break it but nobody else can).
Can I run it so that speedstep/cool'n'quiet works? What I mean I do not want to run anything which increases the CPU frequency. Instead it should keep the CPU at lowest freq. Can this be accomplished?
The magazine it links is one of the most respected in FInland, so it is more likely to be right (than the evening papers).
BTW, one of the links claims his ex girlfriend says he was not nuts. Apparently she did not notice his madness or maybe he cracked afterwards. Who knows, maniac as he was.
My pet peeve is subwoofer. I think its effect far too often overestimated. Their recommendation to use "30-40% of the speaker budget should go to the subwoofer" is IMHO idiotic.
Maybe if you only watch movies and such a movies where the "boom" is most important part of the movie, maybe then there would be sense to put 40% to subwoofer. Or you are in a pissing contest ("mysubisbigger") with your friends...
But if you listen music then you should use 60-80% to main speakers (and divide the rest to center, surround and sub). Maybe forget the sub altogether (especially with a tight budget).
And the "center channel quality"... if the language in the movie is not your mothers tongue it *is* important (english isn't mine, and understanding is easier with a good center). YMMV.
Put as much (of the) money (reserved for this) on the main speakers as you possibly can.
After that get a decent center speaker (the speech of the movies goes through it and a good one will be clearer - especially if you watch movies which are not on your mothers tongue).
The surround speakers do not add much information, they 99% of time just add a little "noise", cheap are pretty much OK.
There are a lot of people who disagree with me here, but: the subwoofer is just too expensive for a budget buyer. Don't get one at all. You will get a lot better main speakers by using e.g. $500 instead of $300 (and $200 for sub). Especially if you are used to listening music (where the sub is mostly useless). Problem: it will not "look" as good (if image is important to you...), but if *will* sound better.
Take a couple of CD's to store and listen. Speakers do sound very different.
P.S. Don't listen $5000 speakers at first ("as a reference") because after that the $500 ones will sound crap:-)
What happens is that you can hear things below the noise floor. Err... no. It is basically the definition of noise: you cannot get any information below it.
Whether the noise is constant (as with CD) or depends with the loudness of music (as with LP) is another topic.
Actually it would be interesting to compare whether a LP has more information than CD, unfortunately compression, changing linear speed, etc. of LP makes this quite hard. Interesting, but not useful (if would not tell anything about which actually sounds better).
Slashdot Mirror
Off topic warning.
:-)
Maybe Java isn't that bad a language after all. It would solve a lot of security issues (not all) and memory issues (again, not all of them). It also could solve quite a few concurrency issues (new tab really should be new thread).
Of course, it would create its own set of problems but pointing them out does not a flamewar make
Unfortunately advertising "5Mbit/s IP-TV" connection sounds worse than "8/1", so I doubt your idea is sellable. It could, but I doubt. I've been wrong before :-)
...
Pure capitalism is the idea of selling stuff (bandwidth in this case) to the highest bidder - clearly against net neutrality. "Free market" has, in principle, no laws/rules against collusions. You are asking government to make a law ("plan") to limit companies from doing "pure capitalism", you could almost say it is kinda socialism. Not that it is bad in itself. Whether it is good in net neutrality issue will be seen (if the law passes).
I was only referring that net neutrality cannot work (unless there is so much bandwidth that QoS is not needed). The reference to communism was just a joke.
BTW, you mix socialism (central government) and communism (none or limited government and no real "economy" as there is no money). Mixing telcos with communism makes no sense. Not that this is important
I always thought charging according to payload would be against net neutrality. This could work, maybe.
... i.e. exactly like now :-)
Though you would have a situation where rich can throttle poor
NO!
This is NOT the way things are meant to work. This is the way Microsoft[1] meant things to "work". F/OSS should have higher standards. I wholly agree though that they don't.
[1] More and more F/OSS fanboys are singing the same song: "There is no security problem unless there is a virus on the wild".
P.S. Thanks for eEye.
I have the feeling that Linux security is going down. I got the feeling about 5 years ago. It probably has been going down for maybe 10 years. I see no end to it, quite contrary.
The reason? You nailed it. Nobody gives a damn when an essential Linux library has huge security hole.
It still would make sense to "max-out" (use as much as possible) VoIP for p2p. Not good.
The limit cannot be below 384kbit/s (low res. video calls). Just make 2-3 "conversation calls" - I am certain people here would complain if you cannot make such a trivial setup without ISP rate limiting you. Right?
Anyway IP-TV is a better example. It most likely will be paid service and therefore people will expect it to work "better" than for e.g. http or neighbors p2p.
It cannot work (better), unless the IP-TV company has better service. That is, the IP-TV company can set QoS parameters which you cannot (ISP routers drops yours immediately).
Net neutrality as a concept is as workable as communism: if people would be happy to get *only* "their share" it could work. Of course it will not happen.
I can prove my point. Check WiFi ISP's. In some areas in USA they do not apparently work properly, unless you use illegal power amplifier/antenna in your access point. You see, there are enough "nice" people using them so unless you are lucky you get a connection which sucks.
There is a huge problem. If e.g. VoIP works "better" than, say bittorrent, the next p2p *will* use VoIP[1] for faster downloads. Software writers and users are willing to game the system (use incorrect QoS settings etc) in order to improve their data rate on the expense of everybody else.
Net neutrality will not succeed, it cannot.
[1] IP-over-VoIP or like.
http://sunsolve.sun.com/show.do?target=patches/patch-access
http://sunsolve.sun.com/show.do?target=patches/zos-s8
Solaris 8 was introduced in 2000.
I am almost certain that IBM, HP, etc. still support 6 years old OS's.
I would say it is an advertisement.
Good old same from Microsoft: "No sense to buy Mac now as we already have preview now and 'soon' the final will be out. And this time we get it right - see the amount of changes!".
Nothing more, nothing less.
Check miniopera.com.
They do not find it insufficient, so maybe the problem is you, not Java ME?
Well, they never took "responsible attitude", but the number of "mistakes" on Microsofts behalf is mind numbing. Especially as they should have known better. ActiveX is such an horrible POS I cannot understand why MS did not kill it. Well, actually, I do: they do not give a shit if it sells.
They still belittle security problems. I do not believe they still design security in mind. How on earth can I not concentrate on the mistakes? I am not superhuman, if there is serious mistake exposed every f*g week for years and years it will eventually get into my brains.
BTW, Linux is getting worse, not better. It was good 10 years ago. Now it is passable. I fear in 5 years it will deteriorate even more. Designers are not "concentrating on the mistakes", you see. I hope my fears are not "fulfilled".
Though I doubt many did even before. The mathematics are not entirely new, some other elliptic curve systems have similar properties (if you can pick the parameters you can break it but nobody else can).
Strange. Whenever moving to Linux people complain about missing games ... apparently they are not compelling now ...
There is no other cross platform API for mobile phones, competently written or not. Unless you consider S60 such.
For me MidpSSH (or similar) is a must, and Opera mini is an excellent tool.
Why community *hours*? Why not taxes?
Can I run it so that speedstep/cool'n'quiet works? What I mean I do not want to run anything which increases the CPU frequency. Instead it should keep the CPU at lowest freq. Can this be accomplished?
You can take mine too.
The magazine it links is one of the most respected in FInland, so it is more likely to be right (than the evening papers).
BTW, one of the links claims his ex girlfriend says he was not nuts. Apparently she did not notice his madness or maybe he cracked afterwards. Who knows, maniac as he was.
Jesus what a crap!
We, the Finns, are absolutely certainly not desensitized. For us humour is one way to deal with the situation.
I agree the joke was bad (not funny at all), but I would be really, *REALLY* surprised if he did not feel anything.
Signing applications is not mandatory.
http://s2putty.sourceforge.net/installs60v3.html
I will never buy a phone which cannot run http://www.xk72.com/midpssh/ or Putty.
Give everyone one OLPC. Rename it OLPS. They wouldn't notice anything.
My pet peeve is subwoofer. I think its effect far too often overestimated. Their recommendation to use "30-40% of the speaker budget should go to the subwoofer" is IMHO idiotic.
...
... if the language in the movie is not your mothers tongue it *is* important (english isn't mine, and understanding is easier with a good center). YMMV.
Maybe if you only watch movies and such a movies where the "boom" is most important part of the movie, maybe then there would be sense to put 40% to subwoofer. Or you are in a pissing contest ("mysubisbigger") with your friends
But if you listen music then you should use 60-80% to main speakers (and divide the rest to center, surround and sub). Maybe forget the sub altogether (especially with a tight budget).
And the "center channel quality"
OK, I'll bite.
...), but if *will* sound better.
:-)
Put as much (of the) money (reserved for this) on the main speakers as you possibly can.
After that get a decent center speaker (the speech of the movies goes through it and a good one will be clearer - especially if you watch movies which are not on your mothers tongue).
The surround speakers do not add much information, they 99% of time just add a little "noise", cheap are pretty much OK.
There are a lot of people who disagree with me here, but: the subwoofer is just too expensive for a budget buyer. Don't get one at all. You will get a lot better main speakers by using e.g. $500 instead of $300 (and $200 for sub). Especially if you are used to listening music (where the sub is mostly useless). Problem: it will not "look" as good (if image is important to you
Take a couple of CD's to store and listen. Speakers do sound very different.
P.S. Don't listen $5000 speakers at first ("as a reference") because after that the $500 ones will sound crap
Whether the noise is constant (as with CD) or depends with the loudness of music (as with LP) is another topic.
Actually it would be interesting to compare whether a LP has more information than CD, unfortunately compression, changing linear speed, etc. of LP makes this quite hard. Interesting, but not useful (if would not tell anything about which actually sounds better).
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for it myself too. I just pointed out the difference.