You're right. And if you take this factor into consideration, you might be able to decide you can't afford the project after all. And save yourself wasting a lot of money on a poorly implemented half-done thing.
Rumination is free labor. If I'm thinking about a project for several weeks when I'm in the shower, trying to sleep, driving - that's extra overtime for free.
Doing all of my thinking on a tight deadline while also doing the actual design or coding involves a lot of bad guessing. But there comes a point where I could just think about all the possibilities forever and never start or get anything done.
But not because they didn't have the spare profit margin. But because it's made national news and everyone knows it costs money.
I would prefer the government agency that controls what words are allowed on television not be involved in regulating the internet.
Spectrum is limited. When it was divided up Americans agreed that it was in the public interest to have content that was acceptable to most Americans. What you might call censorship is really just selection - encouraging content providers to produce what people want. If this wasn't what Americans wanted, there would be more of a push to change that. And there are so many alternate sources for content, I don't see any reason why it needs to change.
However, the FCC is really better suited for the technical aspects. If there actually was another agency that was a better fit, I'm sure they'd love to delegate it.
The FCC did it for phones, who would you put in charge of inter-state communications technology practices?
Also no more of "up to speeds of 300mbts", they should not be allowed to advertise burst speeds, but only the steady state download speeds.
It was never just burst speeds. It was also in the absence of congestion at the first hop node (still inside of the last mile). There is no reason not to oversell bandwidth, provided you'll get relatively close most of the time. It only becomes a problem if you will usually not or never get the advertised speed. The same as it's OK that there isn't a 1:1 correlation between cell tower capacity and registered phones. If everyone dials 911 at the same time, calls will be dropped.
They almost certainly weren't smart enough to keep track of which battery went into which laptop.
If they were trying to put people off, they would have made an EFI-bootable USB image. Would have been better for Linux users and worse for most of their customers.
"Pro" is codeword these days for a glued-shut sealed unit with soldered components. I guess they base "pro" solely on how easy it is to carry around all day.
Plenty of options here: 1) Install Windows 10 to an external hard drive. Run the utility before Windows Activation kicks in. 2) Contact them through the battery recall web site and give them your laptop serial number and battery barcode number (yeah, you might have to take it apart - what do you expect?)
By that logic, I don't see how only Spotify would be illegal (or that radio would be legal - they can only pick one interpretation). Especially when you consider the digital format used by HD Radio.
Yes, they do. And it's part of what nearly bankrupted Pandora before they restructured the way they pay for things. Radio stations do pay a blanket license instead of per-play, but stats are gathered on what songs air and that's used to divide up the blanket license profits between the artists. I may have some of the details a little off, but it's close to it.
I refuse to 'buy' digital music which some company might later decide I no longer am allowed to play.
You'll be glad to know that Amazon and iTunes both sell music in DRM-free formats now. Still, for the price, I can get a physical media backup if I buy on CD instead. And depending on the age of the album, getting that physical backup is either free or lowers the price.
They are probably hitting a wall with low-power performance that can really only be solved by such extensive modification that a new kernel is easier at this point.
While I agree that better picture quality makes a difference, a lot of good movies don't benefit from higher picture quality at all. Especially during that time period and for the much lower price. And any movie that's just a montage of VFX today is usually not even worth a rental. And I'm saying that as someone who owns a fair number of Blu-Rays and has a surround system.
As someone who still enjoys 3D, there is no good home viewing option now that passive 3D is entirely off the home video market. I never wanted active 3D flickering, but even that's going away. You can argue that the quality is pretty bad at times because few studios shoot natively in 3D anymore, but for the right movie it can still be more immersive.
I'll still gladly pay to go see a movie - if only there was anything good. This is no different than competing against VHS rental. When the movies are bad, people will wait or skip entirely. It's been this way for 30+ years.
Generating a bounce is just a way to allow spammers to know if they've found a valid address. I would agree that blocking IPs after X invalid email addresses across X minutes would be smarter - but it doesn't do much against a botnet either.
I may be misremembering how advanced cyber-security was at the time. But how quickly would a brute-force SMTP attack be shut down back then? Would it be? Just sending to every combination of letters and numbers before the @ sign would be very quick when their servers were still fast and not overloaded.
Trips. If you care about saving money but not having a cold house when you get home. But a smart thermostat can also do things like look up the outdoor humidity and adjust how it air conditions (See Nest's Airwave). And wifi is a lot simpler for setup and maintenance than a remote sensor.
And if they have a tax rate payday coming, it's much more profitable to write off a one-time bonus when the corporate rate is higher than to raise wages during a tax cut.
Doesn't help with they sensationalize many things that they should just shut up about.
Are you sure that's not why they get flak in the first place? They make Fox News look like a fair and balanced media source - and they literally have shows with talking heads ranting about things.
The person you replied to appeared to have their own brain. Why are you spouting off standard partisan talking points? Perhaps they aren't in favor of military spending? After all, it's not a fiscally conservative thing to do.
Slashdot Mirror
Or her wifi password has been compromised.
Just see who Tay follows on Twitter.
it may be a time=money calculation.
You're right. And if you take this factor into consideration, you might be able to decide you can't afford the project after all. And save yourself wasting a lot of money on a poorly implemented half-done thing.
Rumination is free labor. If I'm thinking about a project for several weeks when I'm in the shower, trying to sleep, driving - that's extra overtime for free.
Doing all of my thinking on a tight deadline while also doing the actual design or coding involves a lot of bad guessing. But there comes a point where I could just think about all the possibilities forever and never start or get anything done.
Either way the bill is going up
But not because they didn't have the spare profit margin. But because it's made national news and everyone knows it costs money.
I would prefer the government agency that controls what words are allowed on television not be involved in regulating the internet.
Spectrum is limited. When it was divided up Americans agreed that it was in the public interest to have content that was acceptable to most Americans. What you might call censorship is really just selection - encouraging content providers to produce what people want. If this wasn't what Americans wanted, there would be more of a push to change that. And there are so many alternate sources for content, I don't see any reason why it needs to change.
However, the FCC is really better suited for the technical aspects. If there actually was another agency that was a better fit, I'm sure they'd love to delegate it.
The FCC did it for phones, who would you put in charge of inter-state communications technology practices?
Also no more of "up to speeds of 300mbts", they should not be allowed to advertise burst speeds, but only the steady state download speeds.
It was never just burst speeds. It was also in the absence of congestion at the first hop node (still inside of the last mile). There is no reason not to oversell bandwidth, provided you'll get relatively close most of the time. It only becomes a problem if you will usually not or never get the advertised speed. The same as it's OK that there isn't a 1:1 correlation between cell tower capacity and registered phones. If everyone dials 911 at the same time, calls will be dropped.
They almost certainly weren't smart enough to keep track of which battery went into which laptop.
If they were trying to put people off, they would have made an EFI-bootable USB image. Would have been better for Linux users and worse for most of their customers.
"Pro" is codeword these days for a glued-shut sealed unit with soldered components. I guess they base "pro" solely on how easy it is to carry around all day.
Plenty of options here:
1) Install Windows 10 to an external hard drive. Run the utility before Windows Activation kicks in.
2) Contact them through the battery recall web site and give them your laptop serial number and battery barcode number (yeah, you might have to take it apart - what do you expect?)
And now the current investors want to be able to sell off some of their liability while the company still has a dollar value.
By that logic, I don't see how only Spotify would be illegal (or that radio would be legal - they can only pick one interpretation). Especially when you consider the digital format used by HD Radio.
Yes, they do. And it's part of what nearly bankrupted Pandora before they restructured the way they pay for things. Radio stations do pay a blanket license instead of per-play, but stats are gathered on what songs air and that's used to divide up the blanket license profits between the artists. I may have some of the details a little off, but it's close to it.
I refuse to 'buy' digital music which some company might later decide I no longer am allowed to play.
You'll be glad to know that Amazon and iTunes both sell music in DRM-free formats now. Still, for the price, I can get a physical media backup if I buy on CD instead. And depending on the age of the album, getting that physical backup is either free or lowers the price.
They are probably hitting a wall with low-power performance that can really only be solved by such extensive modification that a new kernel is easier at this point.
I thought you were going to link to Sesame Street - now an HBO property...
While I agree that better picture quality makes a difference, a lot of good movies don't benefit from higher picture quality at all. Especially during that time period and for the much lower price. And any movie that's just a montage of VFX today is usually not even worth a rental. And I'm saying that as someone who owns a fair number of Blu-Rays and has a surround system.
As someone who still enjoys 3D, there is no good home viewing option now that passive 3D is entirely off the home video market. I never wanted active 3D flickering, but even that's going away. You can argue that the quality is pretty bad at times because few studios shoot natively in 3D anymore, but for the right movie it can still be more immersive.
receive phase and error out directly against the delivering server
Which means "respond to a spammer and say whether or not they've reached a valid address." Sorry, RFCs are a religion, not a law.
I'll still gladly pay to go see a movie - if only there was anything good. This is no different than competing against VHS rental. When the movies are bad, people will wait or skip entirely. It's been this way for 30+ years.
Generating a bounce is just a way to allow spammers to know if they've found a valid address. I would agree that blocking IPs after X invalid email addresses across X minutes would be smarter - but it doesn't do much against a botnet either.
I may be misremembering how advanced cyber-security was at the time. But how quickly would a brute-force SMTP attack be shut down back then? Would it be? Just sending to every combination of letters and numbers before the @ sign would be very quick when their servers were still fast and not overloaded.
So they sue John Doe and subpoena the ISP records for your address. It's not as hard as you make it sound.
Trips. If you care about saving money but not having a cold house when you get home. But a smart thermostat can also do things like look up the outdoor humidity and adjust how it air conditions (See Nest's Airwave). And wifi is a lot simpler for setup and maintenance than a remote sensor.
And if they have a tax rate payday coming, it's much more profitable to write off a one-time bonus when the corporate rate is higher than to raise wages during a tax cut.
Doesn't help with they sensationalize many things that they should just shut up about.
Are you sure that's not why they get flak in the first place? They make Fox News look like a fair and balanced media source - and they literally have shows with talking heads ranting about things.
The person you replied to appeared to have their own brain. Why are you spouting off standard partisan talking points? Perhaps they aren't in favor of military spending? After all, it's not a fiscally conservative thing to do.