In a truly "free market", private companies would have to own the telephone poles on which they run their lines, and to own the telephone poles, they'd probably have to own the sidewalks. So then they'd snap up sidewalks in walled-off shapes that keep anyone else from putting up poles or running wires into their fiefdom.
Or the government would have to lease the right to run data lines on public property to anyone who asked. But then that government would have to set a price, which means the government is now in the internet business whether they like it or not.
I guess what I'm getting at is that a "free market" for broadband cannot and will never exist.
Neither, but I do trust one simple-to-understand-and-enforce rule ("you shall indiscriminately handle and deliver packets") to take it out of the hands of both.
If they were willing to either A) deliver all of us the kind of bandwidth promised in their Unlimited*** plans, or B) charge by the megabyte instead of by the month, this should be moot. I paid for that bandwidth, and I'll use it as I see fit. If I need to prioritize my own traffic, I'll do so with my router. That way my streaming video doesn't interfere with my VOIP calls.
But they're not talking about that, are they? They don't want my streaming video to interfere with their other customers' VOIP calls... which would seem to suggest that they don't actually have the capacity to deliver their Unlimited****** (up to) 10Mbps** that they sold to everyone in my neighborhood.
We have this fundamental problem where these companies have oversold the bandwidth, and the only solution they're willing to consider is to invent rules that will give you less of what you paid for. Because any other solution would force them to abandon an already-misleading marketing gimmick.
If you're using real, common words and phrases and just transcribing them to 1337, I'm pretty sure there are password cracking tools out there to account for that.
You mean the Facebook info and pictures that I can get you to voluntarily give me by:
Creating a fake Facebook account.
Using a picture of an attractive female in your age range.
Locating your friends.
Carpet-bombing them with friend requests. (Surely someone will bite.)
Sending you a friend request. (I'm a friend of a friend, so we've probably met, and you've just forgotten.)
Reading everything about you.
It doesn't matter what your privacy settings are. I would bet money that you could get access to 99% of Facebook targets' info by following that pattern. Social networks are practically designed for social engineering hacks.
My cable company doesn't have to specifically block competing entertainment services. All they have to do is throttle media streaming in general in the name of "traffic management."
True deregulation means that there is no artificial barriers to entry. Without that "deregulation" is simply a bailout of a protected monopoly.
In which case "true deregulation" may be realistically achievable after you become monarch of the Principality of Aynrandland, but it will never happen in a republic, where competing ideologies and interests must negotiate with one another in order to pass legislation.
That's not really ironic, seeing as those taxpayers voted the idiots onto the school board. It seems pretty appropriate to me. If I hire an employee who does something stupid on behalf of the company, I have to suffer for it. Taxpayers have to suffer for their bad hires, too.
I'm not the GP. I assure you from experience that big, expensive, proprietary in-house solutions are far better than the big, proprietary, pseudo-COTS that the government gets tricked into. Here's how it goes:
Put an RFI out to COTS vendors.
Find out that none of their products meet even 50% of your requirements.
Ignore the previous fact. You'll be off to your next gov't. project, looking like a hero, before the shit hits the fan.
Push for your favorite COTS vendor, possibly the one for whom you used to work. (Hmm...) Fudge all the numbers to make it look good. No one ever got promoted by telling the boss that what he wants to do will be a long and expensive process no matter what.
Gov't pays COTS vendor to modify the product to the point where it is only usable for the government. Congratulations, you've defeated the purpose of COTS and will now shoulder 100% of the cost for any maintenance or new features.
End up with what amounts to a big, expensive in-house solution, only gov't doesn't own the source code, has to pay licensing fees every year, all changes have to go through the "COTS" vendor, and they've got a fat contract for life.
It's cool, like I said, by the time everyone figures this out you, Mr. Bigshot PM, are not even directing that project anymore. You, being the genius who replaced big, expensive in-house stuff with fancy new COTS product, got promoted and moved to the next big thing as soon as everyone signed on the dotted line.
COTS is great in theory, but it's usually a total lie.
PHP really is not that bad. Years ago it had a really horrible default configuration. But PHP, in my opinion, is viewed as worse at security than other scripting languages because it is more frequently used by people who have no business writing server-side code.
Most File Sharers Hypothetically Say They Would Pay For Legal Downloads
What people say in surveys and what they do when there is actual money in play are two different things. What is "cheap"? And what pay service could possibly be as convenient as BitTorrent? If you have to log in and provide payment information, it's already not as convenient.
Anyway, I wouldn't extrapolate too much from that survey.
Slashdot Mirror
That's really unfortunate for the author of Download Statusbar, which I use religiously.
I am well aware that third party extensions for FF4 exist that add status bar function.
I haven't used FF4 myself, but I would be surprised if you couldn't just enable the status bar in about:config, no extensions needed.
This headline is stellar by Slashdot standards. Count your blessings.
In a truly "free market", private companies would have to own the telephone poles on which they run their lines, and to own the telephone poles, they'd probably have to own the sidewalks. So then they'd snap up sidewalks in walled-off shapes that keep anyone else from putting up poles or running wires into their fiefdom.
Or the government would have to lease the right to run data lines on public property to anyone who asked. But then that government would have to set a price, which means the government is now in the internet business whether they like it or not.
I guess what I'm getting at is that a "free market" for broadband cannot and will never exist.
Not the newspeak-named lie of a policy that just came out.
Well, yes, I'm sure they would love that. I was just trying to illustrate the ludicrousness of claiming that ISPs need to do traffic shaping and QoS.
I think he's probably referring to his wireless internet plan, and you're thinking strictly in terms of wires.
Neither, but I do trust one simple-to-understand-and-enforce rule ("you shall indiscriminately handle and deliver packets") to take it out of the hands of both.
If there were only a name for such a rule...
If they were willing to either A) deliver all of us the kind of bandwidth promised in their Unlimited*** plans, or B) charge by the megabyte instead of by the month, this should be moot. I paid for that bandwidth, and I'll use it as I see fit. If I need to prioritize my own traffic, I'll do so with my router. That way my streaming video doesn't interfere with my VOIP calls.
But they're not talking about that, are they? They don't want my streaming video to interfere with their other customers' VOIP calls... which would seem to suggest that they don't actually have the capacity to deliver their Unlimited****** (up to) 10Mbps** that they sold to everyone in my neighborhood.
We have this fundamental problem where these companies have oversold the bandwidth, and the only solution they're willing to consider is to invent rules that will give you less of what you paid for. Because any other solution would force them to abandon an already-misleading marketing gimmick.
That has never stopped anyone from filling something with ads anyway.
If you're using real, common words and phrases and just transcribing them to 1337, I'm pretty sure there are password cracking tools out there to account for that.
It doesn't matter what your privacy settings are. I would bet money that you could get access to 99% of Facebook targets' info by following that pattern. Social networks are practically designed for social engineering hacks.
My cable company doesn't have to specifically block competing entertainment services. All they have to do is throttle media streaming in general in the name of "traffic management."
Hash = 1-way crypto
The only way to "un-md5" anything is to crack it. Also, I'm not sure you actually put any real thought into this.
Since it's best practice to store only password hashes (and not the passwords themselves) in your database (or whatever), your process is apparently:
Yeah, I'm pretty sure a computer could beat me at shogi all day long, seeing as I have no idea how it's played.
In which case "true deregulation" may be realistically achievable after you become monarch of the Principality of Aynrandland, but it will never happen in a republic, where competing ideologies and interests must negotiate with one another in order to pass legislation.
That's not really ironic, seeing as those taxpayers voted the idiots onto the school board. It seems pretty appropriate to me. If I hire an employee who does something stupid on behalf of the company, I have to suffer for it. Taxpayers have to suffer for their bad hires, too.
I voted for Kodos.
It sounds suspiciously like you're trying to break RSA using nothing but VB and naivete.
BASIC Stamp Microcontroller Module
(Yes, I know that's not what you meant.)
COTS is great in theory, but it's usually a total lie.
PHP really is not that bad. Years ago it had a really horrible default configuration. But PHP, in my opinion, is viewed as worse at security than other scripting languages because it is more frequently used by people who have no business writing server-side code.
I use an IBM Model M keyboard from the early 90s. A better typing experience does not exist.
Why don't we just wait for the space robots to find us?
Should be titled:
Most File Sharers Hypothetically Say They Would Pay For Legal Downloads
What people say in surveys and what they do when there is actual money in play are two different things. What is "cheap"? And what pay service could possibly be as convenient as BitTorrent? If you have to log in and provide payment information, it's already not as convenient.
Anyway, I wouldn't extrapolate too much from that survey.