The previous attempts didn't work. Let's see where Trump's plan takes us. I don't like tariffs either. But it's better than doing nothing and watching our economy tank to China.
Yes, there's always a way around. But the point is to minimize the exposure. Depending on the environment rogue Wi-Fi devices wouldn't work, as well as other network file shares.
This solution attempts to fix a problem that doesn't exist.
First off, as many have pointed out, it's the security checks that tend to really slow down admittance to an event.
Second: Slow admittance is a safety feature. You don't want tens of thousands of people rushing into the corridors of an arena all at once. Slow admittance spreads out the crowd.
Nobody would really argue too much about your last statement. It's what that 'distortion' adds is the question.
And that's the problem. A true audiophile would never "add" to the original performance that is being reproduced. It's impossible for a vinyl medium to not introduce additional sounds or alter the sound on playback. Pops, clicks, wow, flutter, etc. Yet, these vinyl fans are almost all self proclaimed audiophiles.
It's not that the annual education budgets are being cut. I'm not aware of that being done anywhere. It's that the annual increases have decreased. There's a big difference there. I'm not saying I agree with the lower increases. I'm pointing out a fact that is not being presented in the media.
...you mean like how a speaker moves air that reaches your ears and moves little hairs? Or do you mean how hitting a drum with a stick makes a sound?
Seems to me that sound IS mechanical.
So what's your point?
No, not at all. I can play a digital recording 1,000 times through a speaker and it will sound exactly the same on the 1,000th time as it did from the first. The same cannot be done of a recording from a vinyl LP record 1,000 times. The record will wear from the friction of playback. It will not sound the same after 1,000 plays.
The drum example is a live performance and doesn't pertain to this discussion.
The USPS law of 2006 references OPM rules. OPM says the age of death for funding purposes is 78.7 years. Lets say, the average USPS employee enters at age 20 and worked 35 years(retired at age of 55) the USPS would have to budgeted for your retirement pay of 23.7 years; this is known as a future liability. Now that gets a little hard, the government knows they will need an employee during that time but they don't know if the person will retire from them, or if they will have a multiple people who each work 5 years during that time. So to solve that the OPM came up with a rule for accounting purposes all federal executive offices, with a few exceptions, have to figure out their retirement future liability and then they have 75 years to make sure that money is ready. That 75 years is for accounting purposes, it is not a requirement to pay 75 years out. As I wrote this applies to almost all federal executive offices. The USPS before 2006 was exempted and they were paying off all medical liabilities each year. The 2006 law made the USPS start to get in line with other federal offices, because the smart people who wrote the law, realized that usage was going down and there is no way the USPS could be paying retirees medical needs come 2030 if they did not have a pre-paid fund.
Prefunding 75 years out is prefunding for employees that haven't been born yet.
Let that sink in.
This is the same requirement as any other federal department. Why would the USPS be treated any differently?
From will_die's post above: "The USPS law of 2006 references OPM rules. OPM says the age of death for funding purposes is 78.7 years. Lets say, the average USPS employee enters at age 20 and worked 35 years(retired at age of 55) the USPS would have to budgeted for your retirement pay of 23.7 years; this is known as a future liability. Now that gets a little hard, the government knows they will need an employee during that time but they don't know if the person will retire from them, or if they will have a multiple people who each work 5 years during that time. So to solve that the OPM came up with a rule for accounting purposes all federal executive offices, with a few exceptions, have to figure out their retirement future liability and then they have 75 years to make sure that money is ready. That 75 years is for accounting purposes, it is not a requirement to pay 75 years out. As I wrote this applies to almost all federal executive offices. The USPS before 2006 was exempted and they were paying off all medical liabilities each year. The 2006 law made the USPS start to get in line with other federal offices, because the smart people who wrote the law, realized that usage was going down and there is no way the USPS could be paying retirees medical needs come 2030 if they did not have a pre-paid fund."
however the private sector isn't forced to prefund retirement for employees it hasn't even hired yet, like congress is forcing the USPS to do.
Reasons for this: 1) Private sector retirement plans are not funded by taxpayers/government. 2) Private sector retirement plans are largely controlled by the employee, not the employer or a pension system. Private sector employees control how the money is invested.
Let's try this - why don't you go down to your local school board and get them to pre-fund their pension 75 years out, just like the USPS? Why not, according to you it is merely being 'fiscally responsible'?
The local school board doesn't have control over their retirement system. That's controlled at the state level.
I understand the people that are nostalgic about LP's. I love the album art. But let's stop pretending that mechanical sound reproduction is anywhere close to a faithful reproduction of the real thing. It's not. I will always introduce sounds that were not apart of the original performance. It's impossible not to do this. It's also extremely expensive to get the best possible reproduction.
A true audiophile knows that the first rule of accurate sound reproduction is to not add to the original performance.
Yes, it has been established the USPS's biggest problem is their need to pre-fund all their pensions for the next 75 years.
Oh the horror, being fiscally responsible.
Many of the pubic sector retirement plans are ponzi schemes that are in the process of unraveling. They are paying out retirements now with money the is being paid into the system. That's not sustainable, it puts millions at risk, and puts taxpayers on the hook for someone else's retirement. All retirement plans should be prepaid/invested. That's the responsible thing to do.
And I say this as a person who recently made the move from the private sector to the public sector.
My point is that the government shouldn't be allowed to pick winners and losers. There are multiple types of video providers, but they are all treated differently. That shouldn't happen.
I'm not defending Comcast. I don't have their service and I've never worked for them or any of their counterparts. It also seems that suing after signing a contract is standard. The plaintiff can show real world examples of real world hardships vs hypotheticals.
Why is Comcast the only provider being required to do this?
Because Comcast is the only provider in VT. They have a monopoly. And just signed an 11 year extension to that monopoly. They're very upset that in exchange for having complete control over the TV and Internet in VT (aside from OTA and wireless) that they are being required to provide an adequate level of service.
The requirement to have public access channels is a federal mandate. Cable companies see this as yet another cost to control, so they're still running on 1990s analog technology to produce them. They're not going to modernize and digitize the public access channels until the FCC tells them they have to. Or strips that requirement from the law, which I bet the cable companies would prefer.
VT has said, "We're giving you a monopoly, and these are the terms." Comcast doesn't like those terms, so instead of not signing that contract extension, they signed it and then sued.
So yeah, they're the same old pieces of shit they've always been.
That's not entirely true. Residents of Vermont can also use Dish, DirecTV, PlayStation Vue, YouTube TV, etc... Comcast has a government-sanctioned monopoly on traditional cable service, but I would bet that more residents get their video service from other providers. Vermont should require all video delivery services to do it, or none at all.
I'm looking from the outside in on this since I don't live in Vermont. On the face of it the requirement seems unfair. Why is Comcast the only provider being required to do this? Is Vermont requiring any other video delivery service that operates in the state to do this? Since I didn't see anything in the article about it I'm going to assume the answer is no. So Comcast has to incur additional costs while other video providers don't. The government (at any level) shouldn't pick winners and losers.
You would be wrong. Frequency division multiplexing (analog signals) was referred to as broadband going back several decades. Many of the technologies used today that are referred to as broadband are actually baseband, or time division multiplexing (digital signals).
But doesn't that require them to be onsite as opposed to "hacking" an election from tens, hundreds or thousands of miles away?
I'm a fan of the scantron sheets myself. They're easy to use, and I get to make sure my ballot is cast when I insert it to the reader. It also provides for easy recounting as well. It's not perfect, but it will do.
I'm looking at you, government. Stop with the taxpayer funded slush funds to quiet your accusers. Let's treat every the same, regardless of their employer. What a concept!!!
Slashdot Mirror
The previous attempts didn't work. Let's see where Trump's plan takes us. I don't like tariffs either. But it's better than doing nothing and watching our economy tank to China.
Yes, there's always a way around. But the point is to minimize the exposure. Depending on the environment rogue Wi-Fi devices wouldn't work, as well as other network file shares.
Why wasn't this caught and enforced during the app validation in the first place?
More proof that a walled garden approach isn't any more secure to an open app environment.
I remember reading reviews where cassette tapes with Dolby S noise reduction was beating MiniDisc in overall sound quality.
This solution attempts to fix a problem that doesn't exist.
First off, as many have pointed out, it's the security checks that tend to really slow down admittance to an event.
Second: Slow admittance is a safety feature. You don't want tens of thousands of people rushing into the corridors of an arena all at once. Slow admittance spreads out the crowd.
Nobody would really argue too much about your last statement. It's what that 'distortion' adds is the question.
And that's the problem. A true audiophile would never "add" to the original performance that is being reproduced. It's impossible for a vinyl medium to not introduce additional sounds or alter the sound on playback. Pops, clicks, wow, flutter, etc. Yet, these vinyl fans are almost all self proclaimed audiophiles.
Very strange.
It's not that the annual education budgets are being cut. I'm not aware of that being done anywhere. It's that the annual increases have decreased. There's a big difference there. I'm not saying I agree with the lower increases. I'm pointing out a fact that is not being presented in the media.
"A malicious actor could fake their IP address, which gives information about a user's computer and its location."
Nope. Not even remotely accurate.
...you mean like how a speaker moves air that reaches your ears and moves little hairs? Or do you mean how hitting a drum with a stick makes a sound?
Seems to me that sound IS mechanical.
So what's your point?
No, not at all. I can play a digital recording 1,000 times through a speaker and it will sound exactly the same on the 1,000th time as it did from the first. The same cannot be done of a recording from a vinyl LP record 1,000 times. The record will wear from the friction of playback. It will not sound the same after 1,000 plays.
The drum example is a live performance and doesn't pertain to this discussion.
From another poster (will_die):
The USPS law of 2006 references OPM rules. OPM says the age of death for funding purposes is 78.7 years. Lets say, the average USPS employee enters at age 20 and worked 35 years(retired at age of 55) the USPS would have to budgeted for your retirement pay of 23.7 years; this is known as a future liability.
Now that gets a little hard, the government knows they will need an employee during that time but they don't know if the person will retire from them, or if they will have a multiple people who each work 5 years during that time. So to solve that the OPM came up with a rule for accounting purposes all federal executive offices, with a few exceptions, have to figure out their retirement future liability and then they have 75 years to make sure that money is ready.
That 75 years is for accounting purposes, it is not a requirement to pay 75 years out.
As I wrote this applies to almost all federal executive offices. The USPS before 2006 was exempted and they were paying off all medical liabilities each year. The 2006 law made the USPS start to get in line with other federal offices, because the smart people who wrote the law, realized that usage was going down and there is no way the USPS could be paying retirees medical needs come 2030 if they did not have a pre-paid fund.
Prefunding 75 years out is prefunding for employees that haven't been born yet.
Let that sink in.
This is the same requirement as any other federal department. Why would the USPS be treated any differently?
From will_die's post above: "The USPS law of 2006 references OPM rules. OPM says the age of death for funding purposes is 78.7 years. Lets say, the average USPS employee enters at age 20 and worked 35 years(retired at age of 55) the USPS would have to budgeted for your retirement pay of 23.7 years; this is known as a future liability.
Now that gets a little hard, the government knows they will need an employee during that time but they don't know if the person will retire from them, or if they will have a multiple people who each work 5 years during that time. So to solve that the OPM came up with a rule for accounting purposes all federal executive offices, with a few exceptions, have to figure out their retirement future liability and then they have 75 years to make sure that money is ready.
That 75 years is for accounting purposes, it is not a requirement to pay 75 years out.
As I wrote this applies to almost all federal executive offices. The USPS before 2006 was exempted and they were paying off all medical liabilities each year. The 2006 law made the USPS start to get in line with other federal offices, because the smart people who wrote the law, realized that usage was going down and there is no way the USPS could be paying retirees medical needs come 2030 if they did not have a pre-paid fund."
however the private sector isn't forced to prefund retirement for employees it hasn't even hired yet, like congress is forcing the USPS to do.
Reasons for this:
1) Private sector retirement plans are not funded by taxpayers/government.
Neither is USPS.
Are you suggesting that the USPS pension system is 100% funded by the employee's contributions?
however the private sector isn't forced to prefund retirement for employees it hasn't even hired yet, like congress is forcing the USPS to do.
Reasons for this:
1) Private sector retirement plans are not funded by taxpayers/government.
2) Private sector retirement plans are largely controlled by the employee, not the employer or a pension system. Private sector employees control how the money is invested.
Let's try this - why don't you go down to your local school board and get them to pre-fund their pension 75 years out, just like the USPS? Why not, according to you it is merely being 'fiscally responsible'?
The local school board doesn't have control over their retirement system. That's controlled at the state level.
I understand the people that are nostalgic about LP's. I love the album art. But let's stop pretending that mechanical sound reproduction is anywhere close to a faithful reproduction of the real thing. It's not. I will always introduce sounds that were not apart of the original performance. It's impossible not to do this. It's also extremely expensive to get the best possible reproduction.
A true audiophile knows that the first rule of accurate sound reproduction is to not add to the original performance.
Yes, it has been established the USPS's biggest problem is their need to pre-fund all their pensions for the next 75 years.
Oh the horror, being fiscally responsible.
Many of the pubic sector retirement plans are ponzi schemes that are in the process of unraveling. They are paying out retirements now with money the is being paid into the system. That's not sustainable, it puts millions at risk, and puts taxpayers on the hook for someone else's retirement. All retirement plans should be prepaid/invested. That's the responsible thing to do.
And I say this as a person who recently made the move from the private sector to the public sector.
My point is that the government shouldn't be allowed to pick winners and losers. There are multiple types of video providers, but they are all treated differently. That shouldn't happen.
I'm not defending Comcast. I don't have their service and I've never worked for them or any of their counterparts. It also seems that suing after signing a contract is standard. The plaintiff can show real world examples of real world hardships vs hypotheticals.
Why is Comcast the only provider being required to do this?
Because Comcast is the only provider in VT. They have a monopoly. And just signed an 11 year extension to that monopoly. They're very upset that in exchange for having complete control over the TV and Internet in VT (aside from OTA and wireless) that they are being required to provide an adequate level of service.
The requirement to have public access channels is a federal mandate. Cable companies see this as yet another cost to control, so they're still running on 1990s analog technology to produce them. They're not going to modernize and digitize the public access channels until the FCC tells them they have to. Or strips that requirement from the law, which I bet the cable companies would prefer.
VT has said, "We're giving you a monopoly, and these are the terms." Comcast doesn't like those terms, so instead of not signing that contract extension, they signed it and then sued.
So yeah, they're the same old pieces of shit they've always been.
That's not entirely true. Residents of Vermont can also use Dish, DirecTV, PlayStation Vue, YouTube TV, etc... Comcast has a government-sanctioned monopoly on traditional cable service, but I would bet that more residents get their video service from other providers. Vermont should require all video delivery services to do it, or none at all.
I'm looking from the outside in on this since I don't live in Vermont. On the face of it the requirement seems unfair. Why is Comcast the only provider being required to do this? Is Vermont requiring any other video delivery service that operates in the state to do this? Since I didn't see anything in the article about it I'm going to assume the answer is no. So Comcast has to incur additional costs while other video providers don't. The government (at any level) shouldn't pick winners and losers.
All of those definitions refer to multiple analog signals. So my point is valid. Thank you for helping me.
You would be wrong. Frequency division multiplexing (analog signals) was referred to as broadband going back several decades. Many of the technologies used today that are referred to as broadband are actually baseband, or time division multiplexing (digital signals).
That was the definition in almost every industry textbook. Long before it was degraded to broadband = fast Internet connection.
So it no longer means "Frequency-Division Multiplexing"?
It also blows my mind how many people in the field don't know the difference between broadband and baseband.
But doesn't that require them to be onsite as opposed to "hacking" an election from tens, hundreds or thousands of miles away?
I'm a fan of the scantron sheets myself. They're easy to use, and I get to make sure my ballot is cast when I insert it to the reader. It also provides for easy recounting as well. It's not perfect, but it will do.
I'm looking at you, government. Stop with the taxpayer funded slush funds to quiet your accusers. Let's treat every the same, regardless of their employer. What a concept!!!