My current account's userid doesn't prove it, but I've been posting to Slashdot since they had less than 50,000 registered users (yeah, I'm old). I can confirm the above as true.
What other naval superpowers would those be? I'd also appreciate some technical references on (1) precisely why whales would make a good model for submarine design, (2) how such designs would exceed current technology in performance and acoustic properties, and (3) some background credentials establishing your authority on the subject.
Refers to Roland Piquepaille, Slashdot userid rpiquepa, infamous author of many Slashdot articles of dubious quality. You can set his stuff to auto-ignore if you like...
For reasons known only to himself, Roland decided to pick this particular random news release and make it sound as if its some important new breakthrough when its nothing of the sort. There's a reason we have the "ohnoitsroland" metatag. It's par for the course for his astute following of "technology trends."
The Navy is very interested in unmanned aircraft that can do extremely high speed maneuvers. Further development in this field will lead not only to fewer pilot deaths, but oddly enough also to reduced defense spending. It takes an unbelievable amount of money to train Naval aviators and provide a steady supply of capable, piloted aircraft.
The little search engine that could told me. That and a few ex-girlfriends who had some experience with swallows, but that's all over now that I'm married.
As a member of the U.S. Navy's submarine force, I can inform you with great assurance that looking to fish for submarine design would be a very bad idea for a great many reasons.
Tell me about it. My brother suffered an awful tilt-a-whirl experience at an amusement park, and they had to clean him up what was left with tortilla chips. Not a pretty sight.
Where's the "ohnoitsroland" meta tag?:) Seriously, though...
The roll rate of the aerobatic A-4 Skyhawk plane is about 720 degrees per second. The roll rate of a barn swallow exceeds 5,000 degrees per second. I'm no physics buff, but doesn't this have something to do with the greatly diminished surface area and related physical stresses on the swallow? Anyone with some aeronautics background care to help me out?
You're telling me you can't get Speakeasy service anywhere in Atlanta? You're badly in need of reeducation. I'm posting from Connecticut (stationed up here in the Navy), but I entered my dad's address and phone number in Lawrenceville, GA (out in the sticks, right?) and he could get Speakeasy service. So then I looked up some random guy named John Smith on whitepages.com who lives in Decatur (most assuredly inside metro Atlanta), and he could get Speakeasy service. I guess I could go on, but why waste my time? I personally know people who use their service in Atlanta, along with a few business customers. You're just wrong.
Maybe you can't get it at your specific address, but to try to claim the entire metro Atlanta market is devoid of Speakeasy coverage is absurd. Got another reply? I'm sure you could make a bigger ass out of yourself if you try a little harder.
At the very least, it represents a breach of contract. They agreed to provide a service, and fail to do so while lying about it. Any before anybody gives me the tired old excuse of "well, you don't have an SLA with a consumer-grade connection", I'd like to point out the vast difference between experiencing infrequent network outages and deliberately cutting off traffic based on protocol.
Those 5% of customers you're talking about probably include more than a few people who are interested in technically novel ways to use the Internet, ways that you, I, or Comcast can't possibly predict right now. What they invent today will have a following tomorrow, and they might just be a tad more influential with persuading other customers to drop Comcast than you might think.
This is anything BUT a win-win for Comcast. This kind of crap might fly now, but as tech progresses faster and faster toward a truly peer-to-peer application and data environment, their approach doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of succeeding. The Internet is more than HTML documents and email, and they're just going to have to get used to it. Do their antics directly affect me? No, since I'm not a customer of theirs. But I do spend a lot of time discouraging people from buying Comcast's services. I recommend less asinine ISPs instead all the time, and people listen.
Right, and when enough people get pissed some new guy comes along with more reasonable service terms, and lots of people switch over to the new company. It's these little things called "competition", "economics", and "technological progress." These same games were played in the 90s over dialup access, albeit in a different form. Didn't work then, won't work now, at least not long term.
Let's turn the parent post into a poll:). I'll vote first:
I'm not even a Comcast customer, and I'm EXTREMELY pissed off at them for actively breaking protocols. They sell Internet access, not "some of the Internet" access. I've had to deal with many, many friends and family member who were pissed off at their service. I get the feeling that they're trying to turn "OMG the pirating downloaders!!!" into some sort of blanket excuse for their technical issues.
New marketing slogan: "Comcast Internet Service: It's Craptastic!"
I'm sure glad I'm not one of their customers. If their moves piss off enough of their customers, they'll either (1) start getting crushed with support issues related to customers frustrated with their service, or (2) start losing customers to ISPs who don't screw with their customers connections constantly. I've seen and heard enough negative PR about Comcast that I actively engage in the practice of telling people to avoid their service at all costs.
Taking your advice, I set up my server to output 10 MB of randomized XML for every pageview on all my websites, but all I got was this lousy bandwidth bill... thanks a lot, buddy.
Most likely someone with enough influence to get wind of the investigation attempt and pull the plug on it. That's probably a very short list of people and/or organizations.
It probably won't improve performance for anything. The issue here isn't the whether Comcast has the available bandwidth, no matter what they might be publically claiming. The issue is their business model with respect to (1) their (mis)understanding of what their customer base wants, and (2) their profit expectations for the level of service provided. As for the ISO taking 5 extra minutes, I can see them easily claiming that lots of completely broken download sessions are simply an effect of customers using "throttled protocols," with their customer service department basically taking a position of "sure, we believe you were downloading legal software, right..."
They're going to need to find a way to deal with the fact that their customers are going to increasingly want access to services that Comcast may find, um... bandwidth intensive. Software delivery and data publication over the net is really in its infancy now... what are they going to do when things really get interesting with peer to peer computing?
I just use my servers to heat my home office. No, really, I'm not kidding; I live in Connecticut, have the office window half open half the time, and this room is still warm. Good thing power is included in my rent here...
Wait... foreign companies, producing drugs at American facilities, for sale in foreign countries, that are illegal to buy in America... my head hurts. I think I need some drugs.
Slashdot Mirror
My current account's userid doesn't prove it, but I've been posting to Slashdot since they had less than 50,000 registered users (yeah, I'm old). I can confirm the above as true.
What other naval superpowers would those be? I'd also appreciate some technical references on (1) precisely why whales would make a good model for submarine design, (2) how such designs would exceed current technology in performance and acoustic properties, and (3) some background credentials establishing your authority on the subject.
Refers to Roland Piquepaille, Slashdot userid rpiquepa, infamous author of many Slashdot articles of dubious quality. You can set his stuff to auto-ignore if you like...
The Navy is very interested in unmanned aircraft that can do extremely high speed maneuvers. Further development in this field will lead not only to fewer pilot deaths, but oddly enough also to reduced defense spending. It takes an unbelievable amount of money to train Naval aviators and provide a steady supply of capable, piloted aircraft.
The little search engine that could told me. That and a few ex-girlfriends who had some experience with swallows, but that's all over now that I'm married.
As a member of the U.S. Navy's submarine force, I can inform you with great assurance that looking to fish for submarine design would be a very bad idea for a great many reasons.
For those in need, here's the official reference on "Estimating the Airspeed Velocity of an Unladen Swallow". Enjoy.
Tell me about it. My brother suffered an awful tilt-a-whirl experience at an amusement park, and they had to clean him up what was left with tortilla chips. Not a pretty sight.
Did you check that out before signing a lease on your current residence? I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess you're living in an apartment.
You're telling me you can't get Speakeasy service anywhere in Atlanta? You're badly in need of reeducation. I'm posting from Connecticut (stationed up here in the Navy), but I entered my dad's address and phone number in Lawrenceville, GA (out in the sticks, right?) and he could get Speakeasy service. So then I looked up some random guy named John Smith on whitepages.com who lives in Decatur (most assuredly inside metro Atlanta), and he could get Speakeasy service. I guess I could go on, but why waste my time? I personally know people who use their service in Atlanta, along with a few business customers. You're just wrong.
Maybe you can't get it at your specific address, but to try to claim the entire metro Atlanta market is devoid of Speakeasy coverage is absurd. Got another reply? I'm sure you could make a bigger ass out of yourself if you try a little harder.
At the very least, it represents a breach of contract. They agreed to provide a service, and fail to do so while lying about it. Any before anybody gives me the tired old excuse of "well, you don't have an SLA with a consumer-grade connection", I'd like to point out the vast difference between experiencing infrequent network outages and deliberately cutting off traffic based on protocol.
Speakeasy. I dare you to prove they screw with their customers' connections.
Those 5% of customers you're talking about probably include more than a few people who are interested in technically novel ways to use the Internet, ways that you, I, or Comcast can't possibly predict right now. What they invent today will have a following tomorrow, and they might just be a tad more influential with persuading other customers to drop Comcast than you might think. This is anything BUT a win-win for Comcast. This kind of crap might fly now, but as tech progresses faster and faster toward a truly peer-to-peer application and data environment, their approach doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of succeeding. The Internet is more than HTML documents and email, and they're just going to have to get used to it. Do their antics directly affect me? No, since I'm not a customer of theirs. But I do spend a lot of time discouraging people from buying Comcast's services. I recommend less asinine ISPs instead all the time, and people listen.
Right, and when enough people get pissed some new guy comes along with more reasonable service terms, and lots of people switch over to the new company. It's these little things called "competition", "economics", and "technological progress." These same games were played in the 90s over dialup access, albeit in a different form. Didn't work then, won't work now, at least not long term.
Let's turn the parent post into a poll :). I'll vote first:
I'm not even a Comcast customer, and I'm EXTREMELY pissed off at them for actively breaking protocols. They sell Internet access, not "some of the Internet" access. I've had to deal with many, many friends and family member who were pissed off at their service. I get the feeling that they're trying to turn "OMG the pirating downloaders!!!" into some sort of blanket excuse for their technical issues.
New marketing slogan: "Comcast Internet Service: It's Craptastic!"
I'm sure glad I'm not one of their customers. If their moves piss off enough of their customers, they'll either (1) start getting crushed with support issues related to customers frustrated with their service, or (2) start losing customers to ISPs who don't screw with their customers connections constantly. I've seen and heard enough negative PR about Comcast that I actively engage in the practice of telling people to avoid their service at all costs.
Taking your advice, I set up my server to output 10 MB of randomized XML for every pageview on all my websites, but all I got was this lousy bandwidth bill... thanks a lot, buddy.
Most likely someone with enough influence to get wind of the investigation attempt and pull the plug on it. That's probably a very short list of people and/or organizations.
It probably won't improve performance for anything. The issue here isn't the whether Comcast has the available bandwidth, no matter what they might be publically claiming. The issue is their business model with respect to (1) their (mis)understanding of what their customer base wants, and (2) their profit expectations for the level of service provided. As for the ISO taking 5 extra minutes, I can see them easily claiming that lots of completely broken download sessions are simply an effect of customers using "throttled protocols," with their customer service department basically taking a position of "sure, we believe you were downloading legal software, right..."
They're going to need to find a way to deal with the fact that their customers are going to increasingly want access to services that Comcast may find, um... bandwidth intensive. Software delivery and data publication over the net is really in its infancy now... what are they going to do when things really get interesting with peer to peer computing?
You stupid bitch!
I just use my servers to heat my home office. No, really, I'm not kidding; I live in Connecticut, have the office window half open half the time, and this room is still warm. Good thing power is included in my rent here...
Wait... foreign companies, producing drugs at American facilities, for sale in foreign countries, that are illegal to buy in America... my head hurts. I think I need some drugs.