No... think of it this way, the network between your DSL modem and "the internet" is not an IP network. It's all hardware. So think about your home router or switch. If you have a computer for you and your wife in the house, and you unplug them from the router, swap the cables and plug them back in... you'd most likely retain the same IP, despite being plugged into a new port.
Now, if you go to your local Telcos remote, open it up, and swap the cable pair your house is on with your neighbors house, you would now have their IP address and they would have yours. The route is controlled by the physical hardware. Once you got all the way back to the office (or remote office) to the DSL card itself, if you were to swap it after that, then yes, the network would correct itself. But up until that point it's all hardware. This is an artifact of how telephone networks were originally designed back in the day and hung on telegraph lines. So much so, that even fiber routes, which should not care about ports at the MUX, still have to be logged in typical telecom software. So suddenly the port matters. You could redesign the software, and there are projects for that at just about every telco in fact... but that's expensive and a lot of work.
Cable TV on the other hand, was designed entirely differently. Some of the first cable providers were simply remote communities that didn't have access to local over the air TV. Usually these were mountain communities. The people on one side of the mountain could get the signal, the people on the other side could not (because the mountain was in the way.) So some smart people put up an antena, caught the signal, built a repeater, and then ran a hardline around the mountain to the other side so they could pick it up. Now they couldn't have it on the same channel because of interference so they had to modulate it... So now they had their very own, enclosed broadcast space. Instead of filling the air with signal, they shielded a single wire with ground, and ran the TV signal down the center. Completely by chance, this made nearly the perfect avenue for a bus network. The way a Cable network works is very similar to how cellphones work. The big difference is that the antennas are in their own discrete environment.
Now, someone will come along and talk about xyz technology that makes everything I said wrong. It's true, there are solutions to all of this. But existing plant infrastructure is worth trillions of dollars. No ones going to just toss it and buy new, especially when the "new" will be outdated in 5yrs anyways. All new tech has to be considered within existing infrastructure.
It's worse than you think. It's cheaper to serve people in areas with high population density. So those people obviously get the faster service. Move to a more rural area and the ISP is likely losing money. Those people in town that are cheap to serve offset the cost. But those people are also the ones with the highest bandwidth and most likely to drop TV service. So as fewer people in the high density areas subscribe, the price for everyone goes up.
Actual data would not fall under the definition of metadata. It would be actual data. And I believe at the moment, with the current hard drive storage tech available to enterprises and consumers, is impossible. For now.
Stuff like IP address, URLs visited, emails sent and received from (not the entire email, just who you messaged and who messaged you), location data etc. can certainly be stored. Most logs will be in text which is highly compressible (I know from my systems gigs and gigs of logs generated daily compresses often to less than 100MB).
Right. I do it for a living. Compressed, 10gigs per day, just for DHCP logs. At that's just so you can know which customer had which IP at a particular time. I started a project to automate some of that, but the data was so immense it would have required dedicated servers and such parse it all. You have to remember, the IP gets assigned to a piece of equipment that is not at the customers house. It may appear to you that the ips actually on your router, but it's not. The customers router then connects to that through a vast internal network. It's not nearly as simple as your home lan. It's not "Bobby had 192.168.1.102" It's "Device 42:64:AB:65:??:?? had IP 192.168.1.102 and that device was on rack 123254856 and that rack was in cabnet 35489461 and that cabinet was in remote 452268212, on feeder trunk XYZ, which connected to MUX 6542584 and then left on copper card 2456684 on pair 5451815 which was frogged to 65628 which led to Ped 254-agd-5684 and left on drop pair 51547 and that pair was assigned to Bobby."
But you may be thinking "All that stuffs static though!" it's not. It gets changed all the time. There are lightening storms, animals chew wires, equipment dies. In any given small town techs swap out hundreds of pairs, equipment, etc... daily. In the current real world, all you need to keep track of is how things are hooked up and what's bad. "Pair 1234 is bad, don't use it" and "Customer 5245 has this route" done... but if you want to know what IP they had at 12:45:01 on friday the 26th, you also have to know all of that intermediary equipment info to make the link. So now, you don't just need to know their plant records currently, you need to know what they were historically for 2 years! It's orders of magnitude more expensive and complicated than the current system. We're talking like overhauling the entire telco infrastructure. Plant records is one of the most expensive IT costs a telco has. Could we redesign the entire network to work differently and eliminate this problem? Yes... but we're talking about a massive project that would involve throwing out all of our equipment and training and starting over.
Now, cable companies are different. I can't really speak to them. They work more like an old Bus network and the COAX is like a big antenna everyone shares. So, theoretically, I would think that the IP gets assigned directly to your cable modem via mac address. You'd have to ask someone that works for a cable company though. There may be a lot of problems there as well, I wouldn't know.
I've worked in the industry for almost 20yrs. It's not possible. Even just storing DHCP data to meet DMCA requests for a very small telco is gigabytes per day. Add their actual traffic to that? The cost of the storage space would make running an ISP totally unprofitable. Even if you did find a way to fund such a thing, how long do you think it would take a group like anonymous to launch on application that just pinged random IP's all day long? It would almost immediately crush the system.
It makes total sense. Why fund a redirect project if you're not even aware of anything that needs redirecting? And if you put the money into the survey and actually find something that needs redirecting, I doubt you'd have a problem getting a budget for it.;-)
The article doesn't seem to point out the obvious explanation, ie that H1B applications contain personal data (of the type Slashdotters are usually passionate about protecting), and that it is good practice not to keep such information hanging around once it has served its primary purpose. There are presumably solutions to the research concerns, such as aggregating the data before it is deleted or collecting the specific data necessary before the records are deleted.
Yes, and this bit:
A full year's worth of LCA data is less than 1GB.
is pure speculation on the authors part. We've no idea what the database structure is, and I've seen some pretty horrific databases before. I once found a server that was logging requests in flat text files... basically CSV format, then those were getting queried via a script. It was creating over 60gig of files per day because the guy that wrote the script didn't want to bother with requesting a table in a local database. Altering the code to get new data into a table took minutes. We moved about 2 years worth of the old data into the table as well but it took months to finish because of the size of the files, the crazy format and the age of the server. The 10 or so years that were older than that? *DELETE*
But I agree with you. Personal info like what would be on these forms? If I were having to deal with that in a database and security asked me what my plan was for protecting this kind of data in the long term, my first response would be "Don't keep it at all" and after they said "Well we need it for at least 5yrs" I'd go with "Ok, delete it at 5yrs" etc...
I've actually had a few data tables that were stored in RAM alone and the data was destroyed pretty much instantly.
I watched that Quantum Conspiracy one. That guys made the same mistake a lot of "smart but not a physicist" types make. Yes, you can explain many quantum effects classically... the double slit experiment is easily explainable using just optics. But that does not invalidate Quantum Mechanics or provide answers to a myriad of other problems that it addresses that are not easily explained without expensive lab equipment and a graphing calculator.
He did explain several things very well though. He's clever, but no matter how badly we want physics to not be so counter intuitive, physics just doesn't care. It's going to be as weird as it wants to, our comfort be damned. The fact of the matter is, you can't wrap your head around it, we're not designed for that.
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media... The Robo-tometrist. The first mechanical optometrist device. While every test subject did get a perfect eyeglass fitting, few after the fitting had eyes left to enjoy them with. And a couple even lost fingers.
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media... An experimental magnetic bong. No more bong water smell! Unfortunately researchers lost it along with their keys and can't remember how to build another one.
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media... Some jerk coughed into the magnetic bong. We thought it was bad getting water on your weed, but gamma rays? Now we're starting to remember why we lost that thing.
Well, I'm hardly a physicist, but it reads like they cut Schrodinger's box in half, pulled a dead kitty out of one and a live kitty out of the other. Is this incorrect?
The fake Libertarians in the Republican party may have other ideas, I wouldn't know.
Sure you do. You've heard of the Iraq War, right? The principle of minimal government ceases to apply when it's a cause you happen to like, such as pre-emptive war or corporate subsidies.
You basically just restated what I'd said. They pick and choose whichever political affiliation suits their current knee jerk reaction. My point was that, often when discussing Libertarian principles, people get the party confused with the republicans who seem to support some of these principles when they suit their agenda. For example they'd like to free us from big government but seem to have no problem with control by big business.
And don't pretend like the democrats are any different. If you hadn't noticed, we're right back to bombing Iraq under Obama. We'll continue to mettle in Middle East affairs until we run out of money or we get the (D)/(R) party out of office. There hasn't been any real difference between the parties for nearly 100 years.
They patent the tools they've designed, and then resell them to businesses. Claiming the profits for themselves to fund their activities outside of federal oversight: http://www.dailydot.com/politi...
What they can do is basically limitless. They believe they can lie to congress, the whitehouse and the courts and likely don't even need federal funding at this point. I suspect their primary target is the whitehouse as the president is the only person that could really do anything about them at all.
There is no "permit" in Libertarian ideals. You're free to be stupid enough to install such a thing. But likewise you're right, there would be no mandate either. And before anyone jumps to the obvious conclusion, yes, if corporations indirectly mandate it by insisting you need one of these installed to buy services or goods, that's still a mandate and should be opposed by the Libertarian party. Chains are chains. The wall they secure you to is irrelevant.
The fake Libertarians in the Republican party may have other ideas, I wouldn't know.
I used to know a guy that owned a website hosting company. He explained that 95% of his customers used less than 1% of the hardrive space or bandwidth their contracts allowed. That was almost all profit to him. But then less than 1% of his customers were barely inside their space and bandwidth limits. Based on how he advertised and marketed things, they were actually paying less than it cost him to host them. i.e. He lost money on those sites. When some little old lady wanted to setup a site to host her online recipee collection? He was all over that. When someone wanted to setup a music video hosting service that already had a following in the thousands? He wasn't so quick to reply.
AT&T doesn't want to throttle these people just to limit their effect on the network. AT&T wants them to leave and never come back.
Mechanically compatible from a scan? Good luck with that!
.
From the review it's clear that this device is very limited. On the other hand, what currently available product is better for the price?
Your question is like asking "This device makes copies of donuts, that come out tasting like tuna-fish. But, the device is only $800 and makes copies donuts better than anything else out there! What else would you buy?"
My answer: More donuts.
This device is not valuable unless it can actually do the thing it's supposed to do. I'm excited about home 3D printing but as of yet it has no value to me. When I can pull a bushing (or whatever) out of a project I'm working on, stick it in a machine like this and get a copy back out... and the only difference is the quality of the plastic I used... I'll buy one. Until then, this is nothing more than a toy for people with no real experience in engineering. Not that I'm dissing that. Toys are fun. But I don't have $800 to blow on something that can't do much more than make misshapen novelties for my coffee table.
Bennett Haselton writes... and writes... and writes some more.
What he writes may be insightful, I wouldn't know. His essays are so long winded that as soon as I see the unending diatribe my eyes skew into the bedazzled glare of a Japanese kid sent into a Pokemon educed epileptic shock. If I'm lucky, my wife will come along and slip some medication under my tong while carefully prying the crushed mouse from my iron grip.
I wont be giving away access to my bank accounts. Sorry, not gonna happen.
And the next time they have a data breach?
That's just full of "Nope!"
I'd tend to agree with you but... Ever tried to dispute a charge with Visa?
I'd say, having dealt with problems with Visa/Mastercard, Direct Deposit, Automated clearing house, etc... I'd say it's all a wash. Credit cards had a purpose at one time. But they abused their position, defrauded the public, charged outrageous fees and were hostile to both merchants and customers alike.
But that's just it. The OnlyFree alternatives. The usability sacrifices they made to make it work on tablets and with remotes made Windows, both 8 and 9, into monstrosities that are horrible for a work environment because Windows doesn't separate their UI From the OS. I personally still use 7 at home because anything newer is horrible to do real work in.
On top of that, businesses have already experienced the problems associated with application dependance with IE6 and WinXP. They all felt the pain and learned their lesson. Every place I've worked over the past 10yrs has had an OS agnostic policy. Any and all new software must work with any OS. Preferably the application would have an HTML frontend so it's 100% agnostic with any OS that supports HTML. This leaves Microsoft in the position of having the only OS out there that costs anything at all, and their customers literally do not want it. The only reason any business would want to keep windows would be legacy apps that predate 2005 or so, and retraining, which is arguably a very big deal but not insurmountable. 20yrs ago we had to train everyone on how to use windows, I guess we can do Linux now.
This is not a good position for Microsoft to be in and continuing to force businesses into software changes they do not want, is not a good idea on Microsofts part. The cost of switching to linux is coming down very quickly. Microsoft should bare that in mind every time they increase the cost of staying with windows. Discontinuing Win7 sales is exactly that. Increasing the cost of their product to the only customers still willing to pay for it.
Basically, if you want an object that vaguely resembles the original but isn't mechanically compatible and only roughly has the same dimensions, then this is your device!
I was heavily into modding. The complexity wasn't really the problem. Those of us doing it had no problem with that. What killed it was the Battlefield franchise. When BF1942 came out, it was such a game changer that it practically killed off the other competition. At the time, no-one played anything else... granted this is from my point of view. I certainly didn't know of people playing much else, it was a great game and had tons of maps.
But at the same time, the map editor for BF1942 was almost completely crippled. You could not use that editor to make the maps that came with the game for example. Not only that, but hosting custom maps was hard to. As they franchise went on, the limited the editor more and more until they finally didn't release one at all. Then they started releasing the game with fewer and fewer maps to the dismay of the players. But the trend was already set.
Now FPS games are released with 5 to 10 maps tops and no option to create more. This is intentional. EA realized that the biggest competition for Battlefied 2 was all the player content from Battlefield 1942. They dont want you playing last years game for free.
There are modern games with Map editors. Team Fortress2 is a good example and its no more difficult to make a map in that than it was in quake (in fact, I think it's a lot easier) But I doubt you'll ever see a flagship game come with a map editor again. It's not a profitable investment.
Good job remembering three maps. Now list thirty bad maps. Do you remember the bad maps?
It was self sorting. You just go to a server with lots of people on it. Bad maps aren't full of players. Generally the clans would figure it out and vet the maps, then host them. Most clans had a couple of map editors. In my clan, that's practically all I did. So much so, that I was terrible at the actual game. The clan loved my maps though:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Blog posts filled with random unsupported opinions = News???
No... think of it this way, the network between your DSL modem and "the internet" is not an IP network. It's all hardware.
So think about your home router or switch. If you have a computer for you and your wife in the house, and you unplug them from the router, swap the cables and plug them back in... you'd most likely retain the same IP, despite being plugged into a new port.
Now, if you go to your local Telcos remote, open it up, and swap the cable pair your house is on with your neighbors house, you would now have their IP address and they would have yours. The route is controlled by the physical hardware. Once you got all the way back to the office (or remote office) to the DSL card itself, if you were to swap it after that, then yes, the network would correct itself. But up until that point it's all hardware. This is an artifact of how telephone networks were originally designed back in the day and hung on telegraph lines. So much so, that even fiber routes, which should not care about ports at the MUX, still have to be logged in typical telecom software. So suddenly the port matters. You could redesign the software, and there are projects for that at just about every telco in fact... but that's expensive and a lot of work.
Cable TV on the other hand, was designed entirely differently. Some of the first cable providers were simply remote communities that didn't have access to local over the air TV. Usually these were mountain communities. The people on one side of the mountain could get the signal, the people on the other side could not (because the mountain was in the way.) So some smart people put up an antena, caught the signal, built a repeater, and then ran a hardline around the mountain to the other side so they could pick it up. Now they couldn't have it on the same channel because of interference so they had to modulate it... So now they had their very own, enclosed broadcast space. Instead of filling the air with signal, they shielded a single wire with ground, and ran the TV signal down the center. Completely by chance, this made nearly the perfect avenue for a bus network. The way a Cable network works is very similar to how cellphones work. The big difference is that the antennas are in their own discrete environment.
Now, someone will come along and talk about xyz technology that makes everything I said wrong. It's true, there are solutions to all of this. But existing plant infrastructure is worth trillions of dollars. No ones going to just toss it and buy new, especially when the "new" will be outdated in 5yrs anyways. All new tech has to be considered within existing infrastructure.
It's worse than you think. It's cheaper to serve people in areas with high population density. So those people obviously get the faster service. Move to a more rural area and the ISP is likely losing money. Those people in town that are cheap to serve offset the cost. But those people are also the ones with the highest bandwidth and most likely to drop TV service. So as fewer people in the high density areas subscribe, the price for everyone goes up.
Actual data would not fall under the definition of metadata. It would be actual data. And I believe at the moment, with the current hard drive storage tech available to enterprises and consumers, is impossible. For now.
Stuff like IP address, URLs visited, emails sent and received from (not the entire email, just who you messaged and who messaged you), location data etc. can certainly be stored. Most logs will be in text which is highly compressible (I know from my systems gigs and gigs of logs generated daily compresses often to less than 100MB).
Right. I do it for a living. Compressed, 10gigs per day, just for DHCP logs. At that's just so you can know which customer had which IP at a particular time. I started a project to automate some of that, but the data was so immense it would have required dedicated servers and such parse it all. You have to remember, the IP gets assigned to a piece of equipment that is not at the customers house. It may appear to you that the ips actually on your router, but it's not. The customers router then connects to that through a vast internal network. It's not nearly as simple as your home lan. It's not "Bobby had 192.168.1.102" It's "Device 42:64:AB:65:??:?? had IP 192.168.1.102 and that device was on rack 123254856 and that rack was in cabnet 35489461 and that cabinet was in remote 452268212, on feeder trunk XYZ, which connected to MUX 6542584 and then left on copper card 2456684 on pair 5451815 which was frogged to 65628 which led to Ped 254-agd-5684 and left on drop pair 51547 and that pair was assigned to Bobby."
But you may be thinking "All that stuffs static though!" it's not. It gets changed all the time. There are lightening storms, animals chew wires, equipment dies. In any given small town techs swap out hundreds of pairs, equipment, etc... daily. In the current real world, all you need to keep track of is how things are hooked up and what's bad. "Pair 1234 is bad, don't use it" and "Customer 5245 has this route" done... but if you want to know what IP they had at 12:45:01 on friday the 26th, you also have to know all of that intermediary equipment info to make the link. So now, you don't just need to know their plant records currently, you need to know what they were historically for 2 years! It's orders of magnitude more expensive and complicated than the current system. We're talking like overhauling the entire telco infrastructure. Plant records is one of the most expensive IT costs a telco has. Could we redesign the entire network to work differently and eliminate this problem? Yes... but we're talking about a massive project that would involve throwing out all of our equipment and training and starting over.
Now, cable companies are different. I can't really speak to them. They work more like an old Bus network and the COAX is like a big antenna everyone shares. So, theoretically, I would think that the IP gets assigned directly to your cable modem via mac address. You'd have to ask someone that works for a cable company though. There may be a lot of problems there as well, I wouldn't know.
I've worked in the industry for almost 20yrs.
It's not possible. Even just storing DHCP data to meet DMCA requests for a very small telco is gigabytes per day. Add their actual traffic to that? The cost of the storage space would make running an ISP totally unprofitable. Even if you did find a way to fund such a thing, how long do you think it would take a group like anonymous to launch on application that just pinged random IP's all day long? It would almost immediately crush the system.
It makes total sense. Why fund a redirect project if you're not even aware of anything that needs redirecting? And if you put the money into the survey and actually find something that needs redirecting, I doubt you'd have a problem getting a budget for it. ;-)
The article doesn't seem to point out the obvious explanation, ie that H1B applications contain personal data (of the type Slashdotters are usually passionate about protecting), and that it is good practice not to keep such information hanging around once it has served its primary purpose. There are presumably solutions to the research concerns, such as aggregating the data before it is deleted or collecting the specific data necessary before the records are deleted.
Yes, and this bit:
A full year's worth of LCA data is less than 1GB.
is pure speculation on the authors part.
We've no idea what the database structure is, and I've seen some pretty horrific databases before. I once found a server that was logging requests in flat text files... basically CSV format, then those were getting queried via a script. It was creating over 60gig of files per day because the guy that wrote the script didn't want to bother with requesting a table in a local database. Altering the code to get new data into a table took minutes. We moved about 2 years worth of the old data into the table as well but it took months to finish because of the size of the files, the crazy format and the age of the server. The 10 or so years that were older than that? *DELETE*
But I agree with you. Personal info like what would be on these forms? If I were having to deal with that in a database and security asked me what my plan was for protecting this kind of data in the long term, my first response would be "Don't keep it at all" and after they said "Well we need it for at least 5yrs" I'd go with "Ok, delete it at 5yrs" etc...
I've actually had a few data tables that were stored in RAM alone and the data was destroyed pretty much instantly.
I watched that Quantum Conspiracy one. That guys made the same mistake a lot of "smart but not a physicist" types make. Yes, you can explain many quantum effects classically... the double slit experiment is easily explainable using just optics. But that does not invalidate Quantum Mechanics or provide answers to a myriad of other problems that it addresses that are not easily explained without expensive lab equipment and a graphing calculator.
He did explain several things very well though. He's clever, but no matter how badly we want physics to not be so counter intuitive, physics just doesn't care. It's going to be as weird as it wants to, our comfort be damned. The fact of the matter is, you can't wrap your head around it, we're not designed for that.
My guesses as follows:
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media...
The Robo-tometrist. The first mechanical optometrist device. While every test subject did get a perfect eyeglass fitting, few after the fitting had eyes left to enjoy them with. And a couple even lost fingers.
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media...
An experimental magnetic bong. No more bong water smell! Unfortunately researchers lost it along with their keys and can't remember how to build another one.
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media...
A female scientist in the 80s? Clearly this was a Halloween party!
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media...
Mecanical penises sound like a good idea until you actually see one in person.
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media...
Come on, we all knew Carl Segans vacuum cleaner would have to look something like this.
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media...
And his Latte machine and barista would look like this.
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media...
Some jerk coughed into the magnetic bong. We thought it was bad getting water on your weed, but gamma rays? Now we're starting to remember why we lost that thing.
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media...
CERN employees require a lot of coffee to get started in the mornings.
It's not either until you look. Measurement is what causes the event to resolve itself.
Well, I'm hardly a physicist, but it reads like they cut Schrodinger's box in half, pulled a dead kitty out of one and a live kitty out of the other. Is this incorrect?
almost...
Ever seen the movie Cube? Like that.
Ironic that as we move towards a cashless society, cash remains the most secure form of payment.
Because no-one's ever been able to steal cash before right?
The fake Libertarians in the Republican party may have other ideas, I wouldn't know.
Sure you do. You've heard of the Iraq War, right? The principle of minimal government ceases to apply when it's a cause you happen to like, such as pre-emptive war or corporate subsidies.
You basically just restated what I'd said. They pick and choose whichever political affiliation suits their current knee jerk reaction. My point was that, often when discussing Libertarian principles, people get the party confused with the republicans who seem to support some of these principles when they suit their agenda. For example they'd like to free us from big government but seem to have no problem with control by big business.
And don't pretend like the democrats are any different. If you hadn't noticed, we're right back to bombing Iraq under Obama. We'll continue to mettle in Middle East affairs until we run out of money or we get the (D)/(R) party out of office. There hasn't been any real difference between the parties for nearly 100 years.
The NSA does not need money.
Federal money comes with oversight.
Like so: http://www.nationaljournal.com...
They patent the tools they've designed, and then resell them to businesses. Claiming the profits for themselves to fund their activities outside of federal oversight:
http://www.dailydot.com/politi...
What they can do is basically limitless. They believe they can lie to congress, the whitehouse and the courts and likely don't even need federal funding at this point. I suspect their primary target is the whitehouse as the president is the only person that could really do anything about them at all.
It's easy to troll anyone. You just have to know what they care about / are sensitive to and attack that.
There is no "permit" in Libertarian ideals. You're free to be stupid enough to install such a thing. But likewise you're right, there would be no mandate either. And before anyone jumps to the obvious conclusion, yes, if corporations indirectly mandate it by insisting you need one of these installed to buy services or goods, that's still a mandate and should be opposed by the Libertarian party. Chains are chains. The wall they secure you to is irrelevant.
The fake Libertarians in the Republican party may have other ideas, I wouldn't know.
There's a reason for sure. It's $$$
I used to know a guy that owned a website hosting company. He explained that 95% of his customers used less than 1% of the hardrive space or bandwidth their contracts allowed. That was almost all profit to him. But then less than 1% of his customers were barely inside their space and bandwidth limits. Based on how he advertised and marketed things, they were actually paying less than it cost him to host them. i.e. He lost money on those sites. When some little old lady wanted to setup a site to host her online recipee collection? He was all over that. When someone wanted to setup a music video hosting service that already had a following in the thousands? He wasn't so quick to reply.
AT&T doesn't want to throttle these people just to limit their effect on the network. AT&T wants them to leave and never come back.
Mechanically compatible from a scan? Good luck with that!
.
From the review it's clear that this device is very limited. On the other hand, what currently available product is better for the price?
Your question is like asking "This device makes copies of donuts, that come out tasting like tuna-fish. But, the device is only $800 and makes copies donuts better than anything else out there! What else would you buy?"
My answer: More donuts.
This device is not valuable unless it can actually do the thing it's supposed to do. I'm excited about home 3D printing but as of yet it has no value to me. When I can pull a bushing (or whatever) out of a project I'm working on, stick it in a machine like this and get a copy back out... and the only difference is the quality of the plastic I used... I'll buy one. Until then, this is nothing more than a toy for people with no real experience in engineering. Not that I'm dissing that. Toys are fun. But I don't have $800 to blow on something that can't do much more than make misshapen novelties for my coffee table.
Bennett Haselton writes... and writes... and writes some more.
What he writes may be insightful, I wouldn't know. His essays are so long winded that as soon as I see the unending diatribe my eyes skew into the bedazzled glare of a Japanese kid sent into a Pokemon educed epileptic shock. If I'm lucky, my wife will come along and slip some medication under my tong while carefully prying the crushed mouse from my iron grip.
I wont be giving away access to my bank accounts. Sorry, not gonna happen.
And the next time they have a data breach?
That's just full of "Nope!"
I'd tend to agree with you but...
Ever tried to dispute a charge with Visa?
I'd say, having dealt with problems with Visa/Mastercard, Direct Deposit, Automated clearing house, etc...
I'd say it's all a wash. Credit cards had a purpose at one time. But they abused their position, defrauded the public, charged outrageous fees and were hostile to both merchants and customers alike.
But that's just it. The OnlyFree alternatives. The usability sacrifices they made to make it work on tablets and with remotes made Windows, both 8 and 9, into monstrosities that are horrible for a work environment because Windows doesn't separate their UI From the OS. I personally still use 7 at home because anything newer is horrible to do real work in.
On top of that, businesses have already experienced the problems associated with application dependance with IE6 and WinXP. They all felt the pain and learned their lesson. Every place I've worked over the past 10yrs has had an OS agnostic policy. Any and all new software must work with any OS. Preferably the application would have an HTML frontend so it's 100% agnostic with any OS that supports HTML. This leaves Microsoft in the position of having the only OS out there that costs anything at all, and their customers literally do not want it. The only reason any business would want to keep windows would be legacy apps that predate 2005 or so, and retraining, which is arguably a very big deal but not insurmountable. 20yrs ago we had to train everyone on how to use windows, I guess we can do Linux now.
This is not a good position for Microsoft to be in and continuing to force businesses into software changes they do not want, is not a good idea on Microsofts part. The cost of switching to linux is coming down very quickly. Microsoft should bare that in mind every time they increase the cost of staying with windows. Discontinuing Win7 sales is exactly that. Increasing the cost of their product to the only customers still willing to pay for it.
There's a lot simpler ways to unlock it than that.
Look at the example pic they have:
http://core0.staticworld.net/i...
That's terrible
Basically, if you want an object that vaguely resembles the original but isn't mechanically compatible and only roughly has the same dimensions, then this is your device!
I was heavily into modding. The complexity wasn't really the problem. Those of us doing it had no problem with that. What killed it was the Battlefield franchise. When BF1942 came out, it was such a game changer that it practically killed off the other competition. At the time, no-one played anything else... granted this is from my point of view. I certainly didn't know of people playing much else, it was a great game and had tons of maps.
But at the same time, the map editor for BF1942 was almost completely crippled. You could not use that editor to make the maps that came with the game for example. Not only that, but hosting custom maps was hard to. As they franchise went on, the limited the editor more and more until they finally didn't release one at all. Then they started releasing the game with fewer and fewer maps to the dismay of the players. But the trend was already set.
Now FPS games are released with 5 to 10 maps tops and no option to create more. This is intentional. EA realized that the biggest competition for Battlefied 2 was all the player content from Battlefield 1942. They dont want you playing last years game for free.
There are modern games with Map editors. Team Fortress2 is a good example and its no more difficult to make a map in that than it was in quake (in fact, I think it's a lot easier) But I doubt you'll ever see a flagship game come with a map editor again. It's not a profitable investment.
Good job remembering three maps. Now list thirty bad maps. Do you remember the bad maps?
It was self sorting. You just go to a server with lots of people on it. Bad maps aren't full of players. :-)
Generally the clans would figure it out and vet the maps, then host them. Most clans had a couple of map editors. In my clan, that's practically all I did. So much so, that I was terrible at the actual game. The clan loved my maps though