Because Bill at the patent office works 12 hour shifts and rubber stamps pretty much anything that comes across his desk at a nice leisurely pace so as not to get fired and yet never truly accomplish anything. Meanwhile his boss Ted regularly decides that 'scotch:30' is the best time to start his lunch break and stroll over to humiliate Bill for a few minutes.
Satire? Perhaps, but considering the "crank them out" attitude held by the administration I doubt this is hits far from the mark.
You need to check your history book. The Internet was paid for by the government and slowly allowed to be handed over to corporations over two decades once it was already long established. Many advances (including computers that you claim are corporate gifts) are actually creations paid for by governments (typically for military purposes) and then handed over to corporations over time for civilian use and implementation.
"...Thus, by 1985, Internet was already well established as a technology supporting a broad community of researchers and developers, and was beginning to be used by other communities for daily computer communications. Electronic mail was being used broadly across several communities, often with different systems, but interconnection between different mail systems was demonstrating the utility of broad based electronic communications between people....This process of privately-financed augmentation for commercial uses was thrashed out starting in 1988 in a series of NSF-initiated conferences at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government on "The Commercialization and Privatization of the Internet" - and on the "com-priv" list on the net itself.. "
Also, claiming that some form of fair competition exists between companies is either a misunderstanding of how modern MSCs (multiple service carrier) operate or a blatant manipulation of the truth to suit a rant. No company can or will attempt to overbuild another MSC in a zone unless one of them is AT&T (in which case you can actually get government grants to over-build them, and money from AT&T at times as well so they look better). Between franchise agreements and city divisions where cable companies will cut a city in half (effectively choosing to "compete" only in certain regions where there really is no competition) customers don't have any semblance of real options.
People here keep assuming that America is doing nothing, but that is highly unlikely. The entire purpose of the SOF community is to go into shit holes like this and get out without being noticed. It only takes a small team of green berets to move in, train a militia and then pull out after the rebels know what to do. Hell, they probably would even help procure regional weapons to avoid suspicion (like, I don't know, blowing up Lybian arms depots similar to the ones that were blown up) and make it look home grown.
"You get what you bargain for" isn't just something cold to say when someone screws up, it is also the truth for any negotiation - including your pay check. If you negotiate a lower sum than you want and then accept it that is your own fault. If someone new negotiates a higher sum and accepts it, that is also their fault (and benefit). People commonly think they have no bargaining power after accepting a job but some of us in this field realize that isn't true. If the "senior" developer feels he deserves more money it is his responsibility to prove it to his leadership team and negotiate a new rate.
On a side note, this is the reason people should keep their mouths shut about what they earn at a job site. Nobody needs to know what you make, and honestly it causes nothing but trouble. I don't know what the three guys in helpdesk make, and they don't know what I make in the Linux division, nor what each other make. Even if they did find out, what business is it of theirs? Perhaps if they want more money they should prove they deserve it.
It is applying to phones these days, which is where I believe you're wrong. You can use a phone for the same things you use a desktop or a notebook for with the only real difference being size. They have different names (phone, desktop, notebook) but they're still just a PC. You can argue all you like and try to nit pick my words but you're still wrong.
You've taken my statement out of context by just chopping at one tiny part of what I was actually saying. Considering I never said anything about a 'four function calculator' or anything similar (unless you consider a dual core 1.3Ghz phone with 1GB RAM and 3D processing to be on par with a 4 function calculator) I think you missed the actual point I was making. If you notice I stated that phones are 'becoming' a PC (dual core processors, dedicated video memory and 3D graphics, multi-gig storage, external video support, etc). My phone is already faster than my PC from six years ago which goes double for my laptop. Simply put, the phone is catching up in utility and is becoming just another 'PC' essentially.
Not to mention PC just means Personal Computer, which is what phones are becoming. I wouldn't say that the PC will ever die, but new hardware trends will emerge over time and old technologies will be overtaken by newer more efficient ones. The Modern Desktop (what they call a PC) is a far cry from what it once was in the beginning and is hardly recognisable in some forms. The truth is that we're moving closer to having one set of portable PCs (smart phones) and a non-portable home-based central network (the Desktop) that controls all of your media. This might be the modern desktop, a new derivative, or it might be the xbox360/PS3 two more generations down the road. But to say that the 'PC' is dead or it's era is coming to an end is short sighted at best.
Actually that is just a popular mis-quote. The actual quote is: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
This has nothing to do with taking it online, its about selling them. You can still sell a modified piece of shit car that puts out more smog than it does horse power. You're a dick for doing it, but Ford has no say in the matter. Microsoft shouldn't have a voice in what this person does with their product once it leaves their warehouse when they sell it to the store (which then sells it again, meaning that he didn't even buy it from Microsoft - he bought it from Target/Walmart/GameStop/Amazon/etc).
Its simply about having the right to do with your own property what you want. The intent of others to get online with a modded XBox isn't his problem, it is their problem and Microsoft's problem. The same goes for the smog maker or whatever else someone sells. Once an item is legally sold you have zero say or responsibility for it or what is done with it.
Actually that is an assumption on your part, as my intent (something you obviously didn't understand) was that any politician (as I actually DID say) that opposes 'any' solution is childish and petty. You should consider not placing intent behind someone else's words when you obviously read into my statement what you wanted to be there.
Cable franchise monopolies are partly enforced to reduce overbuild infrastructures from smothering communities in a sea of coax. Mind you the city itself has the majority of the power in a franchise agreement (unless they're stupid and give it away) but frequently neglects to exercise that power. A good franchise agreement also doesn't prevent similar businesses from entering the area, but instead simply prevents other cable providers from doing so. Thus, an FTTH provider could come in and overbuild a cable provider in a town and there is nothing that the cable provider can do about it except try to provide a better service.
All of this weighs heavily on the franchise license however, which (for various reasons, partly corruption) doesn't always end up being in the people's best interest. A strong community however that is active in local politics will usually have really good restrictions (including the right for the city to fine an operator for poor service). Though I have seen some cities that settle for petty crap instead and give the farm away with the milk. A medium sized MSO I worked for negotiated with one city for services and all they wanted was new projector equipment every year (negotiated at $1,000 value) and a single channel reserved for their local broadcasts. They pretty much let us have our way with the rest of the contract which didn't go so well for them.
House Republicans have already promised to oppose any solution put forth by FCC chairman Julius Genachowski."
Yes, because our tax dollars need to be pissed away into the wind fighting anything and everything one person suggests 'just because'. I'm always amused that politicians talk about intelligence and maturity and wisdom but then they act like a three year old who would rather rip the head off a doll than share it.
Everyone who needs a nuclear-hardened data center can and has built one themselves and is smart enough to keep their damn mouth shut about it. You can't claim to be a nuclear-hardened storage facility when you basically advertise that you should be the direct target for multiple high-yield nuclear strikes in the event of global warfare (not that anyone would be trying to use the internet or restore from backup anyway at that point).
Having actually been in charge of bandwidth allocation for an ISP I can tell you that no sites for any company have an unlimited fat pipe of bandwidth at their disposal. Even the big boys buy from someone else, and what they buy is closely regulated based on current usage and future potential over a pre-determined period of time (factoring in local growth and competition). The price of bandwidth changes based on the location of the demarc and the quantity purchased, so the higher your population density the more bandwidth you need, but you can buy it cheaper because you can spread that price across more people.
Saturation levels of 90% or more are regular during peak hours (6pm-2am) for an ISP (at least one that doesn't lose customers hand over fist) because they run as cheap as possible for as long as possible in order to please management and see better profit numbers. Even when saturation hits 100% you still won't normally 'time out' of anything unless there are very serious issues, but you will likely see higher latency times (which you likely do see regularly during these hours anyway because of saturation).
Prioritization of data will cause latency for other things to become higher, sites will seem slower, and it is wrong to do that to customers. If you were right and there was no limit to bandwidth then it wouldn't be wrong at all to use QoS-for-pay (QfP?) but that is definitely not the case. Companies purposely create a scarcity from the top down when it comes to bandwidth in order to give it an artificial value which is then passed on to big ISPs, then to medium ISPs, then to small ones and then to us. The price just gets bigger the farther down the food chain you go.
True, but cloud computing has a serious obstacle to overcome in this area - the ISP. Every ISP is working on a way to charge per gig per month right now (I know, I work for one that actually has been doing it in the central US for over 3 years). ISPs are one of the greatest threats to tech like this simply because they want to find a way to make more money off providing the same service which is slowly choking the customer out of wanting to use the internet.
Mobile phones don't have the shelf life required to replace the desktop. I like having my PC at home simply because it cannot easily break like a phone can. I don't worry about getting hit in the holster with a door from a careless worker and shattering my touchscreen on my home PC, and I don't worry about someone crushing it when they carelessly sit on a table that my PC rests on. Everyone I know with a smart phone replaces it every couple of years - but I have desktops that last 5 years before I move it to a test bench position or give it to a nephew as an upgrade for him ( even then, I only replace it for gaming purposes and not due to any hardware failures).
OLED won't be here any time soon, you are right, but only because it is already here on the market. OLED can now be found in cell phones, MP3 players, in-dash displays, and televisions already being sold to the public. While the price is high, the quality of these displays is definitely worth it for the early adopter type. Just google 'OLED display' and you'll see a few of the better options already on the market (though for the TVs the price is steep).
... Then of course there is the arm fatigue from pointing at the thing all damned day, it just seems like such a bad idea to me. Yeah, I can see it for like Kiosks, where you are only there a couple of minutes, but everyday?
Arm fatigue: Because moving around and becoming healthy is such a sin that we should avoid it at all costs. Sure, at first there might be some fatigue, but it doesn't hurt and certainly isn't as bad as having carpal tunnel. I've used touch screen displays heavily in the past few months and honestly I love them quite a bit more than using a mouse. My wrist doesn't hurt as much, I can access menus faster without as much interaction from keyboards, and I get a little extra exercise out of it. I've actually considered elevating my displays so that I can use them without having to sit down and thus eliminating my desk chair.
Touch screen interfaces are not only practical, but the "greasy finger" issue is a paper tiger these days. Displays are treated to handle these issues. My brother solved the Cheetoh issue before he ever had it by forcing his kids to wash their hands after every time they eat. Being clean prevents such problems, so now when his kids use the computer he doesn't worry about them doing stuff like that because the issue is non existent. As for pressure from rough usage, there are many types of displays that don't have this problem and the upcoming OLED screens that are being released into the market now are devoid of such short comings.
If people would look at the fucking statistics, they might understand. Guns account for less than 10% of non-fatal violent crimes. Even in fatal crimes, the majority of deaths that are gun related are from suicide (57%).
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/frmdth.htm
Slashdot Mirror
Because Bill at the patent office works 12 hour shifts and rubber stamps pretty much anything that comes across his desk at a nice leisurely pace so as not to get fired and yet never truly accomplish anything. Meanwhile his boss Ted regularly decides that 'scotch:30' is the best time to start his lunch break and stroll over to humiliate Bill for a few minutes. Satire? Perhaps, but considering the "crank them out" attitude held by the administration I doubt this is hits far from the mark.
You should probably submit all of those before Steve Jobs or one of his hoes (I'm sorry, "users" ) does it for you.
You need to check your history book. The Internet was paid for by the government and slowly allowed to be handed over to corporations over two decades once it was already long established. Many advances (including computers that you claim are corporate gifts) are actually creations paid for by governments (typically for military purposes) and then handed over to corporations over time for civilian use and implementation.
"...Thus, by 1985, Internet was already well established as a technology supporting a broad community of researchers and developers, and was beginning to be used by other communities for daily computer communications. Electronic mail was being used broadly across several communities, often with different systems, but interconnection between different mail systems was demonstrating the utility of broad based electronic communications between people....This process of privately-financed augmentation for commercial uses was thrashed out starting in 1988 in a series of NSF-initiated conferences at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government on "The Commercialization and Privatization of the Internet" - and on the "com-priv" list on the net itself.. "
Source: http://www.isoc.org/internet/history/brief.shtml
Also, claiming that some form of fair competition exists between companies is either a misunderstanding of how modern MSCs (multiple service carrier) operate or a blatant manipulation of the truth to suit a rant. No company can or will attempt to overbuild another MSC in a zone unless one of them is AT&T (in which case you can actually get government grants to over-build them, and money from AT&T at times as well so they look better). Between franchise agreements and city divisions where cable companies will cut a city in half (effectively choosing to "compete" only in certain regions where there really is no competition) customers don't have any semblance of real options.
People here keep assuming that America is doing nothing, but that is highly unlikely. The entire purpose of the SOF community is to go into shit holes like this and get out without being noticed. It only takes a small team of green berets to move in, train a militia and then pull out after the rebels know what to do. Hell, they probably would even help procure regional weapons to avoid suspicion (like, I don't know, blowing up Lybian arms depots similar to the ones that were blown up) and make it look home grown.
"You get what you bargain for" isn't just something cold to say when someone screws up, it is also the truth for any negotiation - including your pay check. If you negotiate a lower sum than you want and then accept it that is your own fault. If someone new negotiates a higher sum and accepts it, that is also their fault (and benefit). People commonly think they have no bargaining power after accepting a job but some of us in this field realize that isn't true. If the "senior" developer feels he deserves more money it is his responsibility to prove it to his leadership team and negotiate a new rate. On a side note, this is the reason people should keep their mouths shut about what they earn at a job site. Nobody needs to know what you make, and honestly it causes nothing but trouble. I don't know what the three guys in helpdesk make, and they don't know what I make in the Linux division, nor what each other make. Even if they did find out, what business is it of theirs? Perhaps if they want more money they should prove they deserve it.
No his past self killed you and my past self commented about it. Unfortunately this excuse doesn't work in court.
It is applying to phones these days, which is where I believe you're wrong. You can use a phone for the same things you use a desktop or a notebook for with the only real difference being size. They have different names (phone, desktop, notebook) but they're still just a PC. You can argue all you like and try to nit pick my words but you're still wrong.
You've taken my statement out of context by just chopping at one tiny part of what I was actually saying. Considering I never said anything about a 'four function calculator' or anything similar (unless you consider a dual core 1.3Ghz phone with 1GB RAM and 3D processing to be on par with a 4 function calculator) I think you missed the actual point I was making. If you notice I stated that phones are 'becoming' a PC (dual core processors, dedicated video memory and 3D graphics, multi-gig storage, external video support, etc).
My phone is already faster than my PC from six years ago which goes double for my laptop. Simply put, the phone is catching up in utility and is becoming just another 'PC' essentially.
Not to mention PC just means Personal Computer, which is what phones are becoming. I wouldn't say that the PC will ever die, but new hardware trends will emerge over time and old technologies will be overtaken by newer more efficient ones. The Modern Desktop (what they call a PC) is a far cry from what it once was in the beginning and is hardly recognisable in some forms. The truth is that we're moving closer to having one set of portable PCs (smart phones) and a non-portable home-based central network (the Desktop) that controls all of your media. This might be the modern desktop, a new derivative, or it might be the xbox360/PS3 two more generations down the road. But to say that the 'PC' is dead or it's era is coming to an end is short sighted at best.
Actually that is just a popular mis-quote. The actual quote is:
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
I'm sure it raised someone's salary or some other self-serving agenda that was masked by logic. This is generally how things work around here.
This has nothing to do with taking it online, its about selling them. You can still sell a modified piece of shit car that puts out more smog than it does horse power. You're a dick for doing it, but Ford has no say in the matter. Microsoft shouldn't have a voice in what this person does with their product once it leaves their warehouse when they sell it to the store (which then sells it again, meaning that he didn't even buy it from Microsoft - he bought it from Target/Walmart/GameStop/Amazon/etc). Its simply about having the right to do with your own property what you want. The intent of others to get online with a modded XBox isn't his problem, it is their problem and Microsoft's problem. The same goes for the smog maker or whatever else someone sells. Once an item is legally sold you have zero say or responsibility for it or what is done with it.
Actually that is an assumption on your part, as my intent (something you obviously didn't understand) was that any politician (as I actually DID say) that opposes 'any' solution is childish and petty. You should consider not placing intent behind someone else's words when you obviously read into my statement what you wanted to be there.
It seems you're targeting a strawman here, because I never said anything about Republican or Democrat, I said all politicians.
Cable franchise monopolies are partly enforced to reduce overbuild infrastructures from smothering communities in a sea of coax. Mind you the city itself has the majority of the power in a franchise agreement (unless they're stupid and give it away) but frequently neglects to exercise that power. A good franchise agreement also doesn't prevent similar businesses from entering the area, but instead simply prevents other cable providers from doing so. Thus, an FTTH provider could come in and overbuild a cable provider in a town and there is nothing that the cable provider can do about it except try to provide a better service. All of this weighs heavily on the franchise license however, which (for various reasons, partly corruption) doesn't always end up being in the people's best interest. A strong community however that is active in local politics will usually have really good restrictions (including the right for the city to fine an operator for poor service). Though I have seen some cities that settle for petty crap instead and give the farm away with the milk. A medium sized MSO I worked for negotiated with one city for services and all they wanted was new projector equipment every year (negotiated at $1,000 value) and a single channel reserved for their local broadcasts. They pretty much let us have our way with the rest of the contract which didn't go so well for them.
Funny you mention that, since they have complete jurisdiction over cable TV.
FTFY.
House Republicans have already promised to oppose any solution put forth by FCC chairman Julius Genachowski."
Yes, because our tax dollars need to be pissed away into the wind fighting anything and everything one person suggests 'just because'. I'm always amused that politicians talk about intelligence and maturity and wisdom but then they act like a three year old who would rather rip the head off a doll than share it.
Everyone who needs a nuclear-hardened data center can and has built one themselves and is smart enough to keep their damn mouth shut about it. You can't claim to be a nuclear-hardened storage facility when you basically advertise that you should be the direct target for multiple high-yield nuclear strikes in the event of global warfare (not that anyone would be trying to use the internet or restore from backup anyway at that point).
Having actually been in charge of bandwidth allocation for an ISP I can tell you that no sites for any company have an unlimited fat pipe of bandwidth at their disposal. Even the big boys buy from someone else, and what they buy is closely regulated based on current usage and future potential over a pre-determined period of time (factoring in local growth and competition). The price of bandwidth changes based on the location of the demarc and the quantity purchased, so the higher your population density the more bandwidth you need, but you can buy it cheaper because you can spread that price across more people. Saturation levels of 90% or more are regular during peak hours (6pm-2am) for an ISP (at least one that doesn't lose customers hand over fist) because they run as cheap as possible for as long as possible in order to please management and see better profit numbers. Even when saturation hits 100% you still won't normally 'time out' of anything unless there are very serious issues, but you will likely see higher latency times (which you likely do see regularly during these hours anyway because of saturation). Prioritization of data will cause latency for other things to become higher, sites will seem slower, and it is wrong to do that to customers. If you were right and there was no limit to bandwidth then it wouldn't be wrong at all to use QoS-for-pay (QfP?) but that is definitely not the case. Companies purposely create a scarcity from the top down when it comes to bandwidth in order to give it an artificial value which is then passed on to big ISPs, then to medium ISPs, then to small ones and then to us. The price just gets bigger the farther down the food chain you go.
True, but cloud computing has a serious obstacle to overcome in this area - the ISP. Every ISP is working on a way to charge per gig per month right now (I know, I work for one that actually has been doing it in the central US for over 3 years). ISPs are one of the greatest threats to tech like this simply because they want to find a way to make more money off providing the same service which is slowly choking the customer out of wanting to use the internet.
Mobile phones don't have the shelf life required to replace the desktop. I like having my PC at home simply because it cannot easily break like a phone can. I don't worry about getting hit in the holster with a door from a careless worker and shattering my touchscreen on my home PC, and I don't worry about someone crushing it when they carelessly sit on a table that my PC rests on. Everyone I know with a smart phone replaces it every couple of years - but I have desktops that last 5 years before I move it to a test bench position or give it to a nephew as an upgrade for him ( even then, I only replace it for gaming purposes and not due to any hardware failures).
OLED won't be here any time soon, you are right, but only because it is already here on the market. OLED can now be found in cell phones, MP3 players, in-dash displays, and televisions already being sold to the public. While the price is high, the quality of these displays is definitely worth it for the early adopter type. Just google 'OLED display' and you'll see a few of the better options already on the market (though for the TVs the price is steep).
... Then of course there is the arm fatigue from pointing at the thing all damned day, it just seems like such a bad idea to me. Yeah, I can see it for like Kiosks, where you are only there a couple of minutes, but everyday?
Arm fatigue: Because moving around and becoming healthy is such a sin that we should avoid it at all costs. Sure, at first there might be some fatigue, but it doesn't hurt and certainly isn't as bad as having carpal tunnel. I've used touch screen displays heavily in the past few months and honestly I love them quite a bit more than using a mouse. My wrist doesn't hurt as much, I can access menus faster without as much interaction from keyboards, and I get a little extra exercise out of it. I've actually considered elevating my displays so that I can use them without having to sit down and thus eliminating my desk chair.
Touch screen interfaces are not only practical, but the "greasy finger" issue is a paper tiger these days. Displays are treated to handle these issues. My brother solved the Cheetoh issue before he ever had it by forcing his kids to wash their hands after every time they eat. Being clean prevents such problems, so now when his kids use the computer he doesn't worry about them doing stuff like that because the issue is non existent. As for pressure from rough usage, there are many types of displays that don't have this problem and the upcoming OLED screens that are being released into the market now are devoid of such short comings.
Godwin's Law is in effect. You lose. Good day sir.
If people would look at the fucking statistics, they might understand. Guns account for less than 10% of non-fatal violent crimes. Even in fatal crimes, the majority of deaths that are gun related are from suicide (57%). http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/frmdth.htm