On several occasions I've purchased old school buses, with seats that were so decapitated they were no longer suitable for passengers, cut the back off of them and turned them into a cheap flatbed truck. Just because a device can no longer efficiently complete the task it was designed for does not mean it can not be repurposed for another, just as useful task,
Base your headquarters in some country that would be happy to have you and doesn't have the wests draconian Copyright laws, guarantee never to release my traffic records and to enforce Net Neutrality, and I'll pay you for this service. I'll pay more than I'm paying now. Then you can use that money to buy more satellites and set them up in impoverished countries all over the world. I'd happily pay for 3rd world to have internet access for free if it kept my internet access private.
Won't this just make cracking your wireless network that much quicker? I'm still using 100mb WIRED networking hardware and can't cap it out streaming 1080p video. Why on earth would I want gigabit wireless traffic?
Damned right. I've worked for 3 different telcos and in every single one of them, the most profitable department has always been "Regulatory Affairs." Obama announced his broadband stimulus program and within a few months they were waring money hats while they worked on projects that had been in planning for over 5 years. The government paid telcos to do work that the telcos had already planned to do anyway. It was a cash giveaway, nothing more. The government needs to enforce net neutrality, get the department of weights and measures involved in broadband speeds and stop giving money to private business without requiring results.
Autorun plagues windows? Do people still move files from computer to computer via disc? By default this feature is either turned off or there's a popup asking if you want to run whatever it is that's trying to run. The last time I got a virus from autorun was probably on windows 98, maybe even 95.
The title says they reduced a cell TOWER to the size of a cube, then they show a picture of a guy holding a cube and say it replaces the filing cabinet behind him. Is the tower still required or no? Because I'm fairly sure than most of the cost in a cell tower is the land required by the tower and feeder trunks. If this doesn't replace either then it's pretty much worthless.
Actually this was probably a brilliant idea on their part. They just tainted the evidence against them. They deleted the companies backups and had access to the only copy of the data. So now the data is completely inadmissible in court.
To be frank, you have no idea what you're talking about. This isn't about the government trying to control the internet, it's about the government telling the ISPs to STOP trying to control the internet. It takes extra equipment, extra staff, extra planning to control whos packets get which priority and keep track of billing. All of this will require and entirely new divisions inside ISPs. It's much simpler to just leave everything alone and stop dinking around with traffic shaping. The ISPs have been lying to and defrauding their customers about what bandwidth they can expect with their given package for about a decade. With the advent of recent high bandwidth services such as Netflix, youtube, etc... it's becoming increasing obvious to the average internet user that "something" is wrong. ISPs are trying to blame their customers or the services their customers are trying to use. But the fact of the matter is, the formula is fairly simple, If they are selling you 5mb/s service, you should be able to get that speed at 6pm on a Saturday night. But we all know how unlikely that really is. ISPs need to upgrade their infrastructure and are instead are trying to block their customers from accessing sites that would allow them to use the service they paid for.
A tiny minority of a businesses customers call in for support. In truth, most businesses would rather just be rid of those customers. Once the customers been on the phone with support for a hour or so (cumulative) they've already cost the company more than they probably ever made in profit on that customer. Eventually all support will be online and that will be that.
Piracy may boost the sales of niche markets, but that's not what the media industry cares about. Piracy definitely doesn't help the sales of movies like Pirates of the Caribbean. When everyone already knows about the movie, then the advertising potential that piracy offers doesn't help at all. In fact, if the media industry wants anything, it's control over their market. A zillion niche markets appealing to every audience imaginable is a threat to their 1 movie everyone has to buy business model. But then again, their one movie everyone has to buy business model is what makes 10k+ seeded torrents that download in 10min possible.
doesn't everyone remember how the cellphone companies were able to locate cellphones in the rubble of 9/11, even while they were turned off? Maybe bring some of that tech into play?
Bullshit. If there's 1000 customers in a given area and you only have 1gig of bandwidth, either give everyone 1mb or less connections or only sell 500 phones with 2mb connections. This idea that any ISP can only pay for 1/100th the bandwidth they actually need, sell all their customers 25mb/sec connections that they know their infrastructure can never support and then when no one can get their advertised speeds blame the problems on the users "over using" the very thing, no, the ONLY THING they actually paid for is absolutely insane.
Imagine if all the car companies started putting 1000hp engines in the cars they sell and advertising their top speed at 200mph all without ever upgrading any of the other components in the car. Then when peoples transmissions failed a week after they bought the car the car company stated that a shameful 5% of their customers were abusing the 1000hp engine and they were going to have to put a strict limit of 25miles of travel per day on the car or the warranty were void. The other 95% of their customers would not be affected by this policy because they'd simply never find out they had been ripped off.
If our government only cared about its people for once, we might get them to ban this here as well. No usage caps, Net Neutrality, OMG the ISPs would have to actually start labeling their packages for what they really are! I was recently looking at a local ISPs packages... they had a 60MB/s package for $80... In the fine print of their user agreement there was a 250gig cap. The stupidity of such a package boggles the mind. If anything, users with this package would have to conserve their use to the point that they'd noly be using it to watch netflix and the like at peak times. Their high rate combined with usage habits would almost ensure that they only add to the ISPs congestion problems. While customers with lower speeds but no cap would be spreading their usage out over longer periods of time and not using high instant-use services like netflix.
The only reason for rate caps is to try and force customers into business class or higher rate packages. It's all about profit, nothing more.
If Zynga were to go bankrupt, or change their service in such a way that significantly modified the value of their currency I think their argument about just how "REAL" it really is would change quite a bit. It's only a matter of time before something terrible happens with one of these online currencies and the feds have to step in an regulate. And by regulate, I mean ban outright.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, collecting all the debris in orbit into a single giant ball, then let it drift in orbit, uncontrolled, without thrusters, is a brilliant idea.
On several occasions I've purchased old school buses, with seats that were so decapitated they were no longer suitable for passengers, cut the back off of them and turned them into a cheap flatbed truck. Just because a device can no longer efficiently complete the task it was designed for does not mean it can not be repurposed for another, just as useful task,
Base your headquarters in some country that would be happy to have you and doesn't have the wests draconian Copyright laws, guarantee never to release my traffic records and to enforce Net Neutrality, and I'll pay you for this service. I'll pay more than I'm paying now. Then you can use that money to buy more satellites and set them up in impoverished countries all over the world. I'd happily pay for 3rd world to have internet access for free if it kept my internet access private.
It's called "NetFlix"
If I have a 1gig wireless connection, will it still take a full 10 seconds after I click "Submit" for Slashdot to accept my post?
Won't this just make cracking your wireless network that much quicker? I'm still using 100mb WIRED networking hardware and can't cap it out streaming 1080p video. Why on earth would I want gigabit wireless traffic?
I think the path in which we make our devices green by having them consume our flesh is a path we should tread lightly upon.
Damned right. I've worked for 3 different telcos and in every single one of them, the most profitable department has always been "Regulatory Affairs." Obama announced his broadband stimulus program and within a few months they were waring money hats while they worked on projects that had been in planning for over 5 years. The government paid telcos to do work that the telcos had already planned to do anyway. It was a cash giveaway, nothing more. The government needs to enforce net neutrality, get the department of weights and measures involved in broadband speeds and stop giving money to private business without requiring results.
Autorun plagues windows? Do people still move files from computer to computer via disc? By default this feature is either turned off or there's a popup asking if you want to run whatever it is that's trying to run. The last time I got a virus from autorun was probably on windows 98, maybe even 95.
The title says they reduced a cell TOWER to the size of a cube, then they show a picture of a guy holding a cube and say it replaces the filing cabinet behind him. Is the tower still required or no? Because I'm fairly sure than most of the cost in a cell tower is the land required by the tower and feeder trunks. If this doesn't replace either then it's pretty much worthless.
Actually this was probably a brilliant idea on their part. They just tainted the evidence against them. They deleted the companies backups and had access to the only copy of the data. So now the data is completely inadmissible in court.
To be frank, you have no idea what you're talking about. This isn't about the government trying to control the internet, it's about the government telling the ISPs to STOP trying to control the internet. It takes extra equipment, extra staff, extra planning to control whos packets get which priority and keep track of billing. All of this will require and entirely new divisions inside ISPs. It's much simpler to just leave everything alone and stop dinking around with traffic shaping. The ISPs have been lying to and defrauding their customers about what bandwidth they can expect with their given package for about a decade. With the advent of recent high bandwidth services such as Netflix, youtube, etc... it's becoming increasing obvious to the average internet user that "something" is wrong. ISPs are trying to blame their customers or the services their customers are trying to use. But the fact of the matter is, the formula is fairly simple, If they are selling you 5mb/s service, you should be able to get that speed at 6pm on a Saturday night. But we all know how unlikely that really is. ISPs need to upgrade their infrastructure and are instead are trying to block their customers from accessing sites that would allow them to use the service they paid for.
A tiny minority of a businesses customers call in for support. In truth, most businesses would rather just be rid of those customers. Once the customers been on the phone with support for a hour or so (cumulative) they've already cost the company more than they probably ever made in profit on that customer. Eventually all support will be online and that will be that.
Piracy may boost the sales of niche markets, but that's not what the media industry cares about. Piracy definitely doesn't help the sales of movies like Pirates of the Caribbean. When everyone already knows about the movie, then the advertising potential that piracy offers doesn't help at all. In fact, if the media industry wants anything, it's control over their market. A zillion niche markets appealing to every audience imaginable is a threat to their 1 movie everyone has to buy business model. But then again, their one movie everyone has to buy business model is what makes 10k+ seeded torrents that download in 10min possible.
if your account were compromised, couldn't they just turn it right back on?
what rock are you living under?
doesn't everyone remember how the cellphone companies were able to locate cellphones in the rubble of 9/11, even while they were turned off? Maybe bring some of that tech into play?
I think the penalty for a cellphone is a tad different than for the heroin.
The pirates will have a work around for this about a week after it comes out. It's the non-pirates that will have problems with it.
The sites only free because it's covered in advertising. If that were illegal, wouldn't that make the entire internet illegal?
What are hotmails?
Bullshit. If there's 1000 customers in a given area and you only have 1gig of bandwidth, either give everyone 1mb or less connections or only sell 500 phones with 2mb connections. This idea that any ISP can only pay for 1/100th the bandwidth they actually need, sell all their customers 25mb/sec connections that they know their infrastructure can never support and then when no one can get their advertised speeds blame the problems on the users "over using" the very thing, no, the ONLY THING they actually paid for is absolutely insane.
Imagine if all the car companies started putting 1000hp engines in the cars they sell and advertising their top speed at 200mph all without ever upgrading any of the other components in the car. Then when peoples transmissions failed a week after they bought the car the car company stated that a shameful 5% of their customers were abusing the 1000hp engine and they were going to have to put a strict limit of 25miles of travel per day on the car or the warranty were void. The other 95% of their customers would not be affected by this policy because they'd simply never find out they had been ripped off.
If our government only cared about its people for once, we might get them to ban this here as well. No usage caps, Net Neutrality, OMG the ISPs would have to actually start labeling their packages for what they really are! I was recently looking at a local ISPs packages... they had a 60MB/s package for $80... In the fine print of their user agreement there was a 250gig cap. The stupidity of such a package boggles the mind. If anything, users with this package would have to conserve their use to the point that they'd noly be using it to watch netflix and the like at peak times. Their high rate combined with usage habits would almost ensure that they only add to the ISPs congestion problems. While customers with lower speeds but no cap would be spreading their usage out over longer periods of time and not using high instant-use services like netflix.
The only reason for rate caps is to try and force customers into business class or higher rate packages. It's all about profit, nothing more.
If Zynga were to go bankrupt, or change their service in such a way that significantly modified the value of their currency I think their argument about just how "REAL" it really is would change quite a bit. It's only a matter of time before something terrible happens with one of these online currencies and the feds have to step in an regulate. And by regulate, I mean ban outright.
Had to make it to the 2nd sentence: "Sold legitimately through Zynga, the full amount of chips would have brought in some $12 million."