The point of coming up with a score is to use it internally as a factor in ranking items on someone's news feed. Nobody actually needs to see the score except Facebook when testing and troubleshooting.
If you believe that score is included, then something like Google's PageRank would be the same. Google would effectively be forced to tell you how to game their system by telling you why you're not ranked higher. That would be big news, but I haven't heard a thing like it.
I know you're joking, but even basing it on posting a link is a bad move. I may post a link to an article that is 100% wrong because I want to comment on how wrong it is.
And I suppose next you're going to say that a masquerade ball isn't a social event either. This argument is far older than you are, and I think it was lost that long ago too.
Because once you have a decent line for IP transit (however that may happen), everything can be pushed down it - Internet, telephony, video-on-demand, etc.
If you have a 20Mbps TV channel and you replace it with Multicast IP transit, then that same channel will still use up 20Mbps but with TCP/IP overhead on top of that. And that's a best case scenario.
If the bridge was only over-engineered by 20%, then it would be a disaster to keep using it. That sounds like way too small a margin. They must have underestimated how badly damaged the cable was. If you're looking for someone to blame, it's the people who estimated the strength loss factor, not the people who did nothing once they found out.
If the throttling itself happens within the state, that is not interstate commerce and remains under state jurisdiction. The FCC can regulate quite a few parts of telecom (majority), sure, but some things are simply plain old same-state commerce.
Were they? I've seen plenty of terms that say that you will pay the "current" price when the promotional pricing is up, but none that say what that price actually is.
I talked to a sales rep with AT&T when FTTN came to my area. They said I couldn't even see the contract until the installer came on the install date. I'm sure that's probably a lie, and it also wouldn't have been the only lie (they claimed it was FTTH).
Platforms like this quickly get overrun with spam. Any measures that deal with spam eventually move to dealing with spam created by action groups. One man's censorship is another man's garbage collection - it's only when it gets applied unfairly or unevenly that it becomes a real problem.
I'm only describing the type of system that a lot of medical providers use for HIPAA compliance. And it's set up this way specifically because it doesn't require you to set anything up in advance to be able to receive the message.
You'd think he could go after the employer for fraud. Fraud for hire is still fraud. If you have an offshore hitman you can still be arrested for hiring them.
So it doesn't send you to a secure portal if you're not a gmail user? That would be an immediate failure right there. Email contains only a link and instructions but Gmail client interprets and displays it would be so much smarter.
It's not a phrasing that's used all that much, honestly. But 4x a number is not 4x higher than the original number. What if you reduced 1.01 times higher to 1 time higher. Like I said, it's an awkward phrasing that isn't used much. But it would be 1 time and 1 time again (2x).
Slashdot Mirror
The point of coming up with a score is to use it internally as a factor in ranking items on someone's news feed. Nobody actually needs to see the score except Facebook when testing and troubleshooting.
If you believe that score is included, then something like Google's PageRank would be the same. Google would effectively be forced to tell you how to game their system by telling you why you're not ranked higher. That would be big news, but I haven't heard a thing like it.
Nobody has rights like that in the US.
I know you're joking, but even basing it on posting a link is a bad move. I may post a link to an article that is 100% wrong because I want to comment on how wrong it is.
Not if they don't share your score with you.
And I suppose next you're going to say that a masquerade ball isn't a social event either. This argument is far older than you are, and I think it was lost that long ago too.
news[1] site with commenting[2]
not 'social[2] media[1]'.
Yeah, commenting isn't social and the news isn't media. I'm not so sure I believe you on that.
Same. OTA meets most of my needs, and I fill in a little with Netflix/streaming options. Who needs more TV than that? It's already too much content.
Because once you have a decent line for IP transit (however that may happen), everything can be pushed down it - Internet, telephony, video-on-demand, etc.
If you have a 20Mbps TV channel and you replace it with Multicast IP transit, then that same channel will still use up 20Mbps but with TCP/IP overhead on top of that. And that's a best case scenario.
If the bridge was only over-engineered by 20%, then it would be a disaster to keep using it. That sounds like way too small a margin. They must have underestimated how badly damaged the cable was. If you're looking for someone to blame, it's the people who estimated the strength loss factor, not the people who did nothing once they found out.
If the throttling itself happens within the state, that is not interstate commerce and remains under state jurisdiction. The FCC can regulate quite a few parts of telecom (majority), sure, but some things are simply plain old same-state commerce.
Carriers should never have been able to control the entire media chain from the shooting stage to the living room.
Meanwhile, car makers have to sell cars through dealerships and breweries have to sell their beer through privately-owned bars.
every company practices deceptive advertising because Americans want to be fooled into believing they are getting a good deal.
And the FTC allows made up "fees" to not be considered part of the price. It should be considered lying, not just deceptive advertising.
Were they? I've seen plenty of terms that say that you will pay the "current" price when the promotional pricing is up, but none that say what that price actually is.
I talked to a sales rep with AT&T when FTTN came to my area. They said I couldn't even see the contract until the installer came on the install date. I'm sure that's probably a lie, and it also wouldn't have been the only lie (they claimed it was FTTH).
It's worse when it's not a Netflix Original and instead of trailer it's just a clip reel with bad stock music.
Platforms like this quickly get overrun with spam. Any measures that deal with spam eventually move to dealing with spam created by action groups. One man's censorship is another man's garbage collection - it's only when it gets applied unfairly or unevenly that it becomes a real problem.
Might be a nice perk of not getting updates. If you're lucky you don't get loud autoplaying videos for each movie/series while browsing either.
The trademarks are the proof. Not the main or most relevant infringement
I'm only describing the type of system that a lot of medical providers use for HIPAA compliance. And it's set up this way specifically because it doesn't require you to set anything up in advance to be able to receive the message.
They haven't? It doesn't show in most UIs anymore. I can only give a thumbs up or down rating.
You'd think he could go after the employer for fraud. Fraud for hire is still fraud. If you have an offshore hitman you can still be arrested for hiring them.
So it doesn't send you to a secure portal if you're not a gmail user? That would be an immediate failure right there. Email contains only a link and instructions but Gmail client interprets and displays it would be so much smarter.
5 times is not equal to 5 times higher.
"times higher":
4x + x
It's not a phrasing that's used all that much, honestly. But 4x a number is not 4x higher than the original number. What if you reduced 1.01 times higher to 1 time higher. Like I said, it's an awkward phrasing that isn't used much. But it would be 1 time and 1 time again (2x).
"x% higher"
(x/100) * x + x
It's the exact same number.