Those companies might seriously rely on their Internet connections for business[.]
That's what business-class internet connectivity is being sold for. No matter how important their business thingies are to them; as long as they chose to pay the same amount of money for the same class of residential uplink as I did, I have the right to use as much bandwidth as they do.
The only scenario where this plea for rationing is appropriate would be ISPs so moronic they don't prioritize guaranteed-rate business traffic over cheapskate residential lines. Should this be the case, moving there with a few peering agreements and some sat uplinks for emergencies could turn out to be a goldmine.
Yeah, they should point to moonlight. Actually, they also should tell you about mono on their.NET pages. All of them. Don't forget wine, Cedega and Crossover Office. They're competition, they deserve to be mentioned. Everywhere. Also, tell people visiting their Office sites about Google Docs and OpenOffice. That's marketing!
Yeah. Joe Sixpack won't have any kind of trouble knowing that he has to unlock 53/udp and 80/tcp prior to any web surfing. Also, he'll surely know his banks e-banking interface uses 443/tcp.
What he'll love even more, though, will be finding out what ports pop, pop-ssl, imap, imap-ssl, smtp, fully-tls'd smtp and mapi use. Without thinking, I only recall five of these. How many do you? How many would your non-tech parent/grandparent of choice?
Also, why would you unblock the well-known ports below 1024? Most all of them are registered for use with a major networking protocol and many enjoy widespread real-world usage by non-technical users. If you proposed to close down on the dynamic ports (that's 49152+) or even the registered ones (1025-49151), you might have a point, but closing down the sub-1Ki range would be almost equally bad as simply disconnecting all non-tech users. Try the Internet2 and block all routing back to the general public's internet, you'll like it.
I'm pretty convinced that the tpb staff will work quite a lot more efficient than e.g. average Disney staff, but please keep in mind the different work areas:
The Pirate Bay (regarded as an organization, not the product) does (not including semi-related spin-offs like BayImg)
Maintain a BitTorrent tracker with a nice web interface
(Some legal stuff, mostly responding to complaints, mostly done in a hobby-esque fashion)
The Walt Disney Company (DIS) does
Operate tens of TV channels (ABC x3, several Disney Channels nationally and internationally, ESPN x2,...)
Create feature-length movies as well as many cable and PPV productions
Create records (apparently they do have a WD Records division)
Create theatrical productions
Distribute all of the above, in physical forms, globally
Deal with all legal/administrative problems multinationals have to deal
(Somewhat unrelated) Operate parks in meatspace requiring lots of meatspace personnel
(Unnecessarily) extend copyright laws, sue and generally annoy the living hell out of the general public
Mind the difference between "allowing users to distribute any content" and "creating and distributing (original) content". The former can be performed by a single sysadmin/developer on almost any scale perceivable; the latter requires an ever-growing pile of expensive meatspace representatives.
Of those 214 bidders only very, very few are going for the tweleve C range licenses. There's also a nationwide D license (some $500m) and tons of local A, B and C licenses (some of which haven't even passed the $100k mark). Neither The Man nor The Media was trying to hide this from you, it's newsworthiness just pales in comparison to a multi-billion dollar bid from Google.
No, X has bid $4'294m in round 13 and nobody cared to overbid them in rounds 14 to 16. In 17, the minimum bid to beat X was $4'713m, coincidentally also the first minimum bid to be greater than the $4.6b reserve price. After Y's bid of $4'713m in round 17, the license will go to Y unless Z, X or any other bidder decides to bid the minimum bid in any subsequent round (e.g. $5'271m for rd. 18).
"Quite hefty" is a relative term. In relation to the Pirate Bay with four people behind it, the alleged $4m of advertising income p.a. are hefty. Assuming they spend $2m p.a. on hosting (very probably a lot less, actually), they'd make $500k per person and year, quite a hefty salary, if you ask me.
The MPAA members, OTOH, probably consider anything without a "billion" suffix chump change. Their combined revenue is in the hundreds of billions (too lazy to dig up all the numbers, but it's bound to be in the $100-200bn range). They employ thousands of people. DIS alone has some 130k employees. $4m is somewhere in the range of one of their CEO's pay.
I don't really think so. Hosting and upkeep of their hardware may not be cheap, but if the $4m figure has any ties to reality, they're probably making an OK living off tpb. Also, I don't blame them. Economics 101; they offer a product (torrent search engine with contents of questionable legality), they demand a price (look at the ads or block/ignore them) and the general public appears to find this ratio acceptable.
Also, if they aren't making at least some money off tpb, how do you suppose they pay for hosting and servers? At their size, paying for some traffic spikes probably isn't in an average person's financial reach. Same goes for some additional servers.
A Sony Ericsson P800 (in graphite, not the usual bluish colour), to be exact. But, IIRC, he uses the phone to snap a picture and receive intelligence about the person on said picture prepared (probably) by his minions. Also, his solution appears to work and do so quickly. Not what you'd expect from Accenture.;)
The Dept. of Commerce defines it as a machine with a composite theoretical performance equal to or exceeding 1,500 million theoretical operations per second.
I, for one, find this definition highly stupid and refuse to call a machine capable of less than two orders of magnitude more FLOPS than "enthusiast"-grade hardware of the respective timeframe a supercomputer.
Even though your PSP may outperform them, "the room-filling monstrosities from the 50s" remain supercomputers to me while a '08 supercomputer would need to outperform at least 100 Dual Core 2 Quad systems.
A relative of mine paid some $2500 for what probably were a few broken sectors. Years later, the recovered data (and all the stuff accumulated in between) was, without any backups, stored on the disk he got it from the recovery service. Which started failing, too.
Some people never learn.
Had you read the second word of GPs post, you'd have noticed he's talking about a laptop drawing 18 instead of 15 watts. Laptops are portable computers with attached batteries. They are usually recharged with neat adapters that plug into a wall socket on one end and the laptop on the other providing as much as 90 W of power while drawing sometimes over a hundred watts. Since >100 W is widely regarded as >15 W, laptop charging via 802.3af isn't very common.
W-Lan base stations tend to not have processors as powerful or displays as large as most laptops. Most base stations supporting PoE also, coincidentally, don't draw more power than PoE can provide.
Okay, you seem to be raising three different issues here. First of all, handing out dangerous substances to adults. To paraphrase this smart guy, everything's poisonous, it's all in the dosage. Lettuce is just as lethal as heroin, alcohol or pot, they differ in addictiveness, taste and LD. Assume, just to bear with me here, that pot, just like most any other drug, were to be legally sold from certified producers with quality control in place through certified outlets with trained personnel to any adult. Shouldn't someone who's allowed to move tons of steel at high velocity meters apart from others ("driving a car") or possess the necessary equipment to remotely kill (lots of) random people ("The right to bear arms", anybody?) be responsible enough to read the LD50 (make it an LD5 and label it LD, ffs) value and not consume more of whatever substance he's just bought? Secondly, the gateway drug effect. I don't mean to be rude here but do you realize the incredible stupidity of this argument? Of fucking course outlawing pot will turn it into a gateway drug of sorts, just like outlawing alcohol or tomatos would. Regulate, tax and cut your citizens some motherfucking slack. Seriously. Then take the warning labels off everything and teach those mouthbreathers some personal fucking responsability. Last but probably not least, motivation issues. Fact I: I do not regularly consume pot. I may have consumed some THC during my life by sitting in the vicinity of a smoking joint, but the last occurence of such certainly is more than the 48 hours necessary to rid one's body of remaining THC ago. I'd even say my hair should be clean to the months-old tips. What I'm getting to: I don't do pot.
Fact II: I am not motivated to continue this discussion.
If lack of motivation was to correlate with drug (ab)use, I'd lack it and be motivated. I'm not, therefore your third and final argument can be considered proven wrong, pot be legalized and the world made a better place. Over and out.
Germany's privacy is being very actively dismantled. Protests about the changes are taking place, but it probably isn't where you'd want your site to be hosted right now. Housing space and bandwidth, OTOH, are damn cheap over there, way cheaper than most anywhere else, including the U.S.
A guide demonstrating how an unaltered version of OS X (OSx86 does not count) was installed onto a machine assembled from off-the-shelf parts and
A non-apple store selling the parts mentioned in said guide and
Finally, if step 1 didn't cover this, a guide demonstrating how to install OS X onto a machine assembled from off-the shelf parts while staying inside license limits
Alternatively, I'll also settle for a link to official Apple documentation of a currently sold Apple PC that is capable of running an unmodified version of OS X within license terms yet delivered without it.
In the meantime I, just like anybody who actually read Apple's EULA, will continue to consider all retailed versions of OS X upgrades. Just like for upgrade versions of Windows, some proof of ownership of a license for a previous version (Apple-branded PC, Microsoft-branded CD-ROM) is required.
No. If they sold 200% less copies of Vista than XP, they'd buy as many Vista licenses (from whomever would sell them to MSFT) than they sold XP licenses. 200% less than 100 copies sold is minus 100 copies sold, i.e. 100 copies bought. 50% less than 100 copies sold is 50 copies sold, of which, in turns, 200% copies sold would be 100 copies.
Also, Vista Ultimate is sold for some $200 (OEM) to $210 (Upgrade if you insist on retail packaging). Using the $400 retail price tag for comparison doesn't work out because Leopard's an upgrade (and some $80 cheaper at that) and neither Vista's nor XP's retail editions account(ed) for the majority of sales.
This may sound stupid, but having read some books often appears to make the difference between a YouTube-esque
they're skillz are so uber !! its of to be the best ! HAHAHA
and a/. style
Silly question... but... what is the difference between sitting on the couch reading a book and sitting on the couch and playing a video game?
of discussion.
I don't have proof for any of this, but would explain quite a bit of my better-than-average writing skills in my native language (which is not english, don't take this post as a representative sample) with me having read more books (your average fiction, mostly. Few great works of literature, few badly written pulp works) than what'd be considered the average. Again, this may not be representative for whatever community you chose to examine; for the observations I made in mine it appears true.
And you missed again. Going by their respective market capitals, GOOG is worth some $170b, slightly less than (AT&)T at $222b. GOOG may not be the biggest player in the game, but they sure as hell are bigger than a whole lot of others: Verizon (VZ): $110b. Sprint (S): $24b. Qwest (Q): $10b. Level (3): $4.5b. Even Cisco (CSCO, $145b) and, believe it or not, IBM (IBM, $146b) are "smaller" than Google.
The most direct way to extinct any given virus still is to immediately let it infect any lifeform it can. Immune lifeforms will live on while the (now hostless) virus won't.
Also, this would fix the overpopulation troubles. Unfortunately most humans don't quite want to risk their lives to kill a single boring virus.
Unfortunately for them, they're actually using "antibacterial hand lotion". Were they to use bacterial hand lotion, their immune system would be trained with every application, resulting in superhumanly immune hands.
For all the cases where silently cooling the inside ambient temperature to below body temperature is possible, you're, of course, absolutely right. In some cases, though, the "silent" aspect turns this into quite a feat, that's where the case materials' conductivity I was referring to comes into play. Some (e.g. Zalman) made attempts to directly connect heat sources (CPU, GPU) to the case via heatpipes. From what I've heard, this can work quite well but failed due to weight, cost, installation difficulties and somewhat unique design.
Judging from their names, Jurassic Park (1993) featured two women in somewhat significant roles; Laura Dern (*1967) as Dr. Ellie Sattler (26 years old when the movie was released, unlikely candidate) and Ariana Richards (*1979) in the role of Lex Murphy (that's 14 y/o at release; looks spot-on).
As of 2006, Ms Richards was attending Western Oregon University and appears to have become a successful painter. With 28 years of age she fits neatly into the "23-43" thing and should, statistically speaking, have about the same life expectancy as the poster of TFAd (assuming he's 33 years old and both individual's lifespans match national averages of 75 and 81 years, respectively).
Slashdot Mirror
The only scenario where this plea for rationing is appropriate would be ISPs so moronic they don't prioritize guaranteed-rate business traffic over cheapskate residential lines. Should this be the case, moving there with a few peering agreements and some sat uplinks for emergencies could turn out to be a goldmine.
Yeah, they should point to moonlight. Actually, they also should tell you about mono on their .NET pages. All of them. Don't forget wine, Cedega and Crossover Office. They're competition, they deserve to be mentioned. Everywhere. Also, tell people visiting their Office sites about Google Docs and OpenOffice. That's marketing!
Yeah. Joe Sixpack won't have any kind of trouble knowing that he has to unlock 53/udp and 80/tcp prior to any web surfing. Also, he'll surely know his banks e-banking interface uses 443/tcp.
What he'll love even more, though, will be finding out what ports pop, pop-ssl, imap, imap-ssl, smtp, fully-tls'd smtp and mapi use. Without thinking, I only recall five of these. How many do you? How many would your non-tech parent/grandparent of choice?
Also, why would you unblock the well-known ports below 1024? Most all of them are registered for use with a major networking protocol and many enjoy widespread real-world usage by non-technical users. If you proposed to close down on the dynamic ports (that's 49152+) or even the registered ones (1025-49151), you might have a point, but closing down the sub-1Ki range would be almost equally bad as simply disconnecting all non-tech users. Try the Internet2 and block all routing back to the general public's internet, you'll like it.
The Pirate Bay (regarded as an organization, not the product) does (not including semi-related spin-offs like BayImg)
The Walt Disney Company (DIS) does
- Operate tens of TV channels (ABC x3, several Disney Channels nationally and internationally, ESPN x2,...)
- Create feature-length movies as well as many cable and PPV productions
- Create records (apparently they do have a WD Records division)
- Create theatrical productions
- Distribute all of the above, in physical forms, globally
- Deal with all legal/administrative problems multinationals have to deal
- (Somewhat unrelated) Operate parks in meatspace requiring lots of meatspace personnel
- (Unnecessarily) extend copyright laws, sue and generally annoy the living hell out of the general public
Mind the difference between "allowing users to distribute any content" and "creating and distributing (original) content". The former can be performed by a single sysadmin/developer on almost any scale perceivable; the latter requires an ever-growing pile of expensive meatspace representatives.Except your Hummer craves Brawndo which has Electrolytes!
Also, your Hummer wins at crushing ponies.
Of those 214 bidders only very, very few are going for the tweleve C range licenses. There's also a nationwide D license (some $500m) and tons of local A, B and C licenses (some of which haven't even passed the $100k mark). Neither The Man nor The Media was trying to hide this from you, it's newsworthiness just pales in comparison to a multi-billion dollar bid from Google.
No, X has bid $4'294m in round 13 and nobody cared to overbid them in rounds 14 to 16. In 17, the minimum bid to beat X was $4'713m, coincidentally also the first minimum bid to be greater than the $4.6b reserve price. After Y's bid of $4'713m in round 17, the license will go to Y unless Z, X or any other bidder decides to bid the minimum bid in any subsequent round (e.g. $5'271m for rd. 18).
"Quite hefty" is a relative term. In relation to the Pirate Bay with four people behind it, the alleged $4m of advertising income p.a. are hefty. Assuming they spend $2m p.a. on hosting (very probably a lot less, actually), they'd make $500k per person and year, quite a hefty salary, if you ask me.
The MPAA members, OTOH, probably consider anything without a "billion" suffix chump change. Their combined revenue is in the hundreds of billions (too lazy to dig up all the numbers, but it's bound to be in the $100-200bn range). They employ thousands of people. DIS alone has some 130k employees. $4m is somewhere in the range of one of their CEO's pay.
Also, if they aren't making at least some money off tpb, how do you suppose they pay for hosting and servers? At their size, paying for some traffic spikes probably isn't in an average person's financial reach. Same goes for some additional servers.
A Sony Ericsson P800 (in graphite, not the usual bluish colour), to be exact. But, IIRC, he uses the phone to snap a picture and receive intelligence about the person on said picture prepared (probably) by his minions. Also, his solution appears to work and do so quickly. Not what you'd expect from Accenture. ;)
The Dept. of Commerce defines it as a machine with a composite theoretical performance equal to or exceeding 1,500 million theoretical operations per second.
I, for one, find this definition highly stupid and refuse to call a machine capable of less than two orders of magnitude more FLOPS than "enthusiast"-grade hardware of the respective timeframe a supercomputer.
Even though your PSP may outperform them, "the room-filling monstrosities from the 50s" remain supercomputers to me while a '08 supercomputer would need to outperform at least 100 Dual Core 2 Quad systems.
If it doesn't, move to Europe. 230V will kill more.
A relative of mine paid some $2500 for what probably were a few broken sectors. Years later, the recovered data (and all the stuff accumulated in between) was, without any backups, stored on the disk he got it from the recovery service. Which started failing, too.
Some people never learn.
Had you read the second word of GPs post, you'd have noticed he's talking about a laptop drawing 18 instead of 15 watts. Laptops are portable computers with attached batteries. They are usually recharged with neat adapters that plug into a wall socket on one end and the laptop on the other providing as much as 90 W of power while drawing sometimes over a hundred watts. Since >100 W is widely regarded as >15 W, laptop charging via 802.3af isn't very common.
W-Lan base stations tend to not have processors as powerful or displays as large as most laptops. Most base stations supporting PoE also, coincidentally, don't draw more power than PoE can provide.
Okay, you seem to be raising three different issues here.
First of all, handing out dangerous substances to adults. To paraphrase this smart guy, everything's poisonous, it's all in the dosage. Lettuce is just as lethal as heroin, alcohol or pot, they differ in addictiveness, taste and LD. Assume, just to bear with me here, that pot, just like most any other drug, were to be legally sold from certified producers with quality control in place through certified outlets with trained personnel to any adult. Shouldn't someone who's allowed to move tons of steel at high velocity meters apart from others ("driving a car") or possess the necessary equipment to remotely kill (lots of) random people ("The right to bear arms", anybody?) be responsible enough to read the LD50 (make it an LD5 and label it LD, ffs) value and not consume more of whatever substance he's just bought?
Secondly, the gateway drug effect. I don't mean to be rude here but do you realize the incredible stupidity of this argument? Of fucking course outlawing pot will turn it into a gateway drug of sorts, just like outlawing alcohol or tomatos would. Regulate, tax and cut your citizens some motherfucking slack. Seriously. Then take the warning labels off everything and teach those mouthbreathers some personal fucking responsability.
Last but probably not least, motivation issues. Fact I: I do not regularly consume pot. I may have consumed some THC during my life by sitting in the vicinity of a smoking joint, but the last occurence of such certainly is more than the 48 hours necessary to rid one's body of remaining THC ago. I'd even say my hair should be clean to the months-old tips. What I'm getting to: I don't do pot.
Fact II: I am not motivated to continue this discussion.
If lack of motivation was to correlate with drug (ab)use, I'd lack it and be motivated. I'm not, therefore your third and final argument can be considered proven wrong, pot be legalized and the world made a better place. Over and out.
A security warning is attempting to pop up. Cancel or Allow?
Germany's privacy is being very actively dismantled. Protests about the changes are taking place, but it probably isn't where you'd want your site to be hosted right now. Housing space and bandwidth, OTOH, are damn cheap over there, way cheaper than most anywhere else, including the U.S.
- A guide demonstrating how an unaltered version of OS X (OSx86 does not count) was installed onto a machine assembled from off-the-shelf parts and
- A non-apple store selling the parts mentioned in said guide and
- Finally, if step 1 didn't cover this, a guide demonstrating how to install OS X onto a machine assembled from off-the shelf parts while staying inside license limits
- Alternatively, I'll also settle for a link to official Apple documentation of a currently sold Apple PC that is capable of running an unmodified version of OS X within license terms yet delivered without it.
In the meantime I, just like anybody who actually read Apple's EULA, will continue to consider all retailed versions of OS X upgrades. Just like for upgrade versions of Windows, some proof of ownership of a license for a previous version (Apple-branded PC, Microsoft-branded CD-ROM) is required.No. If they sold 200% less copies of Vista than XP, they'd buy as many Vista licenses (from whomever would sell them to MSFT) than they sold XP licenses. 200% less than 100 copies sold is minus 100 copies sold, i.e. 100 copies bought. 50% less than 100 copies sold is 50 copies sold, of which, in turns, 200% copies sold would be 100 copies.
Also, Vista Ultimate is sold for some $200 (OEM) to $210 (Upgrade if you insist on retail packaging). Using the $400 retail price tag for comparison doesn't work out because Leopard's an upgrade (and some $80 cheaper at that) and neither Vista's nor XP's retail editions account(ed) for the majority of sales.
Also, AFAIK, the illegal part of MSFT's monopoly has ended, unlike the continued support of XP in general or support by MSFT's current productivity suite.
Long story short: Try trolling people who don't know anything about the topic at hand or find better arguments.
I don't have proof for any of this, but would explain quite a bit of my better-than-average writing skills in my native language (which is not english, don't take this post as a representative sample) with me having read more books (your average fiction, mostly. Few great works of literature, few badly written pulp works) than what'd be considered the average. Again, this may not be representative for whatever community you chose to examine; for the observations I made in mine it appears true.
And you missed again. Going by their respective market capitals, GOOG is worth some $170b, slightly less than (AT&)T at $222b. GOOG may not be the biggest player in the game, but they sure as hell are bigger than a whole lot of others: Verizon (VZ): $110b. Sprint (S): $24b. Qwest (Q): $10b. Level (3): $4.5b. Even Cisco (CSCO, $145b) and, believe it or not, IBM (IBM, $146b) are "smaller" than Google.
The most direct way to extinct any given virus still is to immediately let it infect any lifeform it can. Immune lifeforms will live on while the (now hostless) virus won't.
Also, this would fix the overpopulation troubles. Unfortunately most humans don't quite want to risk their lives to kill a single boring virus.
Unfortunately for them, they're actually using "antibacterial hand lotion". Were they to use bacterial hand lotion, their immune system would be trained with every application, resulting in superhumanly immune hands.
For all the cases where silently cooling the inside ambient temperature to below body temperature is possible, you're, of course, absolutely right. In some cases, though, the "silent" aspect turns this into quite a feat, that's where the case materials' conductivity I was referring to comes into play. Some (e.g. Zalman) made attempts to directly connect heat sources (CPU, GPU) to the case via heatpipes. From what I've heard, this can work quite well but failed due to weight, cost, installation difficulties and somewhat unique design.
Judging from their names, Jurassic Park (1993) featured two women in somewhat significant roles; Laura Dern (*1967) as Dr. Ellie Sattler (26 years old when the movie was released, unlikely candidate) and Ariana Richards (*1979) in the role of Lex Murphy (that's 14 y/o at release; looks spot-on).
As of 2006, Ms Richards was attending Western Oregon University and appears to have become a successful painter. With 28 years of age she fits neatly into the "23-43" thing and should, statistically speaking, have about the same life expectancy as the poster of TFAd (assuming he's 33 years old and both individual's lifespans match national averages of 75 and 81 years, respectively).