ATT is split into 3 companies (or more). Each is forced to compete with each other.
Wireless carriers across the board end up needing to cooperate (share bandwidth) to please national plan customers, fostering price competition between companies, and yet increased coverage for all customers.
Since there will be several competitors, prices will be more aligned with customer desires instead of the 'limited choice' gouging that we experience now with the Oligopoly.
Even now, the smallest competitor, Sprint, offers the most/best services for your dollar. 5 smartphones get all you can eat data/calling/messaging/4g, for 230 dollars on my family plan. And roaming is free (which means I'm on your verizon network anyway).
I can't believe you're trying to defend this atrocious expression of anti-trust and consumer fuxxover.
They're basically saying "if our customers have to wait 2-hours for customer service, T-mobil's customers should too!".
I wish ATT didn't exist. *MOST* people I know who have any interaction with them HATE them and have been screwed over by them -- and they gladly provide that IT WAS THEIR ONLY CHOICE when they did business with them.
I wish ATT would stop being such trash. And I can't believed people would put up with such horrid service just to use an iPhone.
How does buying up another telco player encourage competition?
It doesn't. And I find it ironic that REPUBLICANS (those who tout 'competition') are questioning why the buying of competitors should be challenged.
Vote like a retard; vote Republican. They will lie lie lie and screw you all day, don't people see that? I realize both parties are pro-corporate, but you've gotta be blind or ignorant not to see how ridiculous it is to vote GOP/TeaParty(fake)/Republitard/Conservative nowadays unless you make $1M+/year. And even then its greed you'd be voting for.
Lol. Neither is half the programming crap that gets discussed, but you don't hear me complaining. It would appear that medical concerns are a popular topic; I agree, and you don't. It would appear that programming slander/gossip/biz is a popular topic; I disagree, you probably like it. Move on.
No. Healthcare costs are where they are because the CAPITALISM factor is involved.
With Single Payer Non-Profit, you can expect a 40-50% decrease in total cost to insure. Modeling after Canada's cost/person, a reduction from $1.5TR/250M-people to $1TR/300M-people is possible. That means the 250 million that pay for insurance are paying 1.5 TRILLION a year for shoddy, exclusion rich, insurance when the sum of all Americans, 300 million people, would be paying 1 TRILLION to cover everyone without any exclusions or b.s. trickery.
I've talked to over 40 canadians about how they feel about their single-payer system and NOT A SINGLE ONE agreed with the US-paid-pundits that lie about how canadian's don't like their healthcare. Matter of fact, more than 25% of them laughed when I first asked, knowing that I had been exposed to the US-paid-pundits and required truthful answers.
Capitalism at its finest.... people have needs... you have answers.... gouge em till they stop asking! Or gouge their insurance and drive rates up for everyone.
CAPITALISM DOES NOT BELONG IN MEDICINE. SINGLE PAYER, NON PROFIT. DO IT.
... to produce hybrid technology that would make use of both. I'm not an engineer, but I'm sure some level of hybridization could be produced that would permit a system of prioritization/fragmentation that would make the most efficient use of the hybrid drive. I can even imagine someone developing software that would analyze system performance and make recommendations as to which fragment of the drive (solid/disk) an application ought be run from.
No doubt, a naysayer lacking creativity will tell me its not possible... Please refrain because I will only tell you to stfu and try inventing instead of reproducing.
"Once it was the rule that lots of people were taught to type at school - but most of them were girls and most ended up in low-skilled jobs. As a result typing is seen as a manual worker's skill not worthy of anyone with a brain and a prospect of working smart."
Wtf?!?!?
Also, typing, as with all skills, is improved by having interest in improvement (called humility) and the result of expressing said interest (called practice/study).
This article is worthless; people lacking skills won't care because in truth they lack the humility or interest in realizing growth.
For both ya'll... PS3 are great. I've had one for years, has lasted this whole time, and is playing the new Bad Lieutenant right now on netflix. If you have a media server on your home network, you can access it with the PS3. You can also put in yoru own HDD and not break the warranty. Sony tells you exactly how. That way you can do all kinds of media storing, etc.
PS3 is great. Blu Ray, HD, 3d gaming and movies, media playing, open platform for USB hardware and bluetooth hardware. I know people on slashdot hate sony and for their reasons, and i understand them. I've thought about whether i would buy the next generation... who knows.. but I do appreciate what I have. Great gear.
Bing is pure crap. I've used it 5 times (different days) and did searches... every single time the first page of bing results was almost completely irrelevant. In all cases I was disgruntled by the blatant crap and tried the search in google (an engine I trust) and saw desired results in the first 3 hits.
I know its anecdotal, kinda, but for me the experimnt was absolutely conclusive; bing is trash.
Now you're trying to hide the foot in your mouth. Come on, man. There is a story that builds and has drama. But what about having a 'role' and 'playing' it necessitates a 'dramatic arc' anyway? You're just trying too hard to say its not an RPG despite your blatant ignorance to having played it. (If you've played it, please get an IQ test and report back immediately.)
I wish I had time to respond in full, but I don't right now (pretty busy with life, sorry about that because you deserve more from me).
But what I can say is that the needs I'm talking about are absolutely realistic, encompassing the complexity of society as it exists today and the intricacies that induce participation in competitive roles to fulfill needs. I could brainstorm many points in the fundamental human needs you posted that are not available by social means, especially once one considers relative differences in individuals -- when you take individuals into consideration, one must exercise sympathy in their analysis of what is possible because this is reality, not some utopia where we can assume all people had proper parenting, psychology, and education through their upbringing. We have total buffoons that cannot think around a problem that you or I might do readily -- and yet they are real, and many will echo their limitations through their own progeny.
My point being that, no, our needs are not met by social means, and capitalism *has* pit us against each other for our needs; and even beyond that, if our absolutely realistic structure of society forces people to perceive 'better things' as 'needs', what's the difference? The *reality* is that many will perceive a car as a need (though I would argue that current societal structures in the US almost absolutely require personal vehicles as needs because of the poor design that we live in), even if they could ride a bike or walk. At that point you should be fully in support of expanded social education, to cover the need for people to understand the truth behind what is and isn't an actual need -- the point being that if you wish to achieve a global understanding of needs that are not simply memetic-wants, you will NEED more education that will not arise without social input (aka not spontaneously or by capital gains means).
Maybe I'll find some more time to expand on this with you. I urge you to brainstorm from the list you provided and consider those needs and how some are only achieved by the money that mediates and is sourced by some form of obligate labor (mental or physical).
An example: Your landlord neglected the black mold in your walls that is getting you sick because he gave his daughter 10k (for chemo for her daughter) and can't afford the expensive mold removal. He screws you, but not from malice, only to provide the Protection(care) that is a need on that very list and is not available socially. (Yes, I realize maybe this didn't happen to you, but its a real world example demonstrating how capitalism can pit us against each other.)
... what we know is that this is just another form of information security.
The people who produce false reviews will develop a tool that not only fakes the reviews, but then applies this exact software (in the article) to analyze it, and then provides logical adjustments until this exact software cannot discern the difference between the adjusted outcome or real reviews.
All these cold wars suck. A little honesty and integrity in the world would be great, but when capitalism pits us against each other to survive (not for wants, but for needs), this is exactly what you should expect. I prefer cooperation over competition, when it comes to survival, but if the social environment dictates that I must do bad to survive, I must survive.
If you respond, please don't be the shallow minded bum that thinks there isn't a causal relationship between what I just said and how people fake reviews (for revenue).
I recall the conversation being you defending the flawed 'known' solution (which was just shown as flawed in the article) against the idea of innovation to remove security holes from the tech. If you read my other posts on this topic, where I brainstorm and urge forward progress in thinking, you'd notice that my blinders are fully removed and it is the assumptions of those who think they 'know' the limitations of what is possible (as you are) that are in defense of flawed products that (in my opinion) could use a bit more work.
There is no need for the computer to have access to a battery in a way that would modify it. If the firmware is flawed, that should arise in testing, and if still flawed, could be fixed through recall and/or in-store flashing. Or the chips on the battery can be internal, while reporting the necessary information (total charge, time left) via analog or digital display that does not have 2-way communication with the OS. But nah... You've engineered plants, so you *know* its not possible to do it without OS access to the firmware... Good luck with that, as I said before. Your merits in plant engineering appear insignificant when you defend flaws in the face of urges to innovate.
I saw that happen on The Sims while my sim was sleeping.... It was forgiven.
Also, they saw that 'you' left behind a bit of evidence that you'd been there -- thus exacerbating the overrreaction to the non-harming foul -- thus meaning that guy needs YEARS in prison.
yes... copies of 1s and 0s... and of restricted truth...
Its not that complicated. Science magazine is between 75-150 dollars per year and you get a physical copy every other week mailed to your door.
Ads? Yes. Huge popularity? Yes. (I realize these two factors play a role in the reduced price).
Some of the 3-5k/year journals out there might find far more readership, and advertising sponsors, if they tried a reduced price model for a while. My band (in sig) operates at a slight loss, but the goal is to gain enough exposure to overcome that problem (and to ultimately make money so we can fund charities, if you listen to our tunes you'd understand). Its an investment (and on the personal level, its totally worth it for the awesome life experience.).
So he downloaded tons of scientific truth, and took extraordinary means to do so.
There is a saying... "no harm, no foul." The point of the saying being that even though an action may have occurred that is of some infringing nature, if there is no harm, the infringement can be easily forgiven.
I just want to know why MIT is holding the truth so tightly and only dictating its implications through press release and patented products; the truth should be free.
You're not really going to try, at all, are you? You're talking about what we already know, and ignoring the fact that it is reckless/vulnerable for convenience.
Meh... you can scan all my other posts on this topic for some inspiration. Real inventors have ideas, and then make it reality -- they don't look at reality and accept it as is.
All you said was 'change the locks'. That's pretty lame.
You could still have internal chips and firmware... my point is that the communication directly to the computer/os is unecessary, and that a hardware display would suffice for showing the amount of battery left. But in this case, the backdoor was built, and the backdoor was broken. I'm saying that people should try to think around the doors, but I guess you missed that point.
I never said for controlling charge and discharge, that would be something that would require absolutely no communication with the actual computer, thus the 'door' would not exist anyway.
What i'm talking about is an analog readout that is physically connected to the battery and simply reports the amount in it. Hell, it could even be a digital display, but the point being that it doesn't communicate with the computer/os, but rather directly to a small display somewhere on your device.
oh.. but that's me not having a clue, huh... yeah... look where 'not trying new things' got apple. keep those blinders on, you'll fare well as a peon.
So instead of spending an extra 6 months and some more people invested in a debug (so you could have a reliable finalized product that requires no patches), you just open doors and assume that only you will be the one going through it... yeah.... smart... oh wait.. we're talking about this for a reason.
The big point here is beyond batteries. And the solution will not come from shortsighted, uninventive, run-of-the-mill engineers and companies. The solutions will not be something you've seen before, but may involve things you've seen before.
quick answer: the firmware updates should be administered by physical port access by an in-store support clerk using a small handheld device that is in no way connected to the internet or any network. (10 second idea, and maybe even a good one!)
Slashdot Mirror
I read your first sentence. I read no more. Please move away.
Better yet:
ATT is split into 3 companies (or more). Each is forced to compete with each other.
Wireless carriers across the board end up needing to cooperate (share bandwidth) to please national plan customers, fostering price competition between companies, and yet increased coverage for all customers.
Since there will be several competitors, prices will be more aligned with customer desires instead of the 'limited choice' gouging that we experience now with the Oligopoly.
Even now, the smallest competitor, Sprint, offers the most/best services for your dollar. 5 smartphones get all you can eat data/calling/messaging/4g, for 230 dollars on my family plan. And roaming is free (which means I'm on your verizon network anyway).
I can't believe you're trying to defend this atrocious expression of anti-trust and consumer fuxxover.
They're basically saying "if our customers have to wait 2-hours for customer service, T-mobil's customers should too!".
I wish ATT didn't exist. *MOST* people I know who have any interaction with them HATE them and have been screwed over by them -- and they gladly provide that IT WAS THEIR ONLY CHOICE when they did business with them.
I wish ATT would stop being such trash. And I can't believed people would put up with such horrid service just to use an iPhone.
How does buying up another telco player encourage competition?
It doesn't. And I find it ironic that REPUBLICANS (those who tout 'competition') are questioning why the buying of competitors should be challenged.
Vote like a retard; vote Republican. They will lie lie lie and screw you all day, don't people see that? I realize both parties are pro-corporate, but you've gotta be blind or ignorant not to see how ridiculous it is to vote GOP/TeaParty(fake)/Republitard/Conservative nowadays unless you make $1M+/year. And even then its greed you'd be voting for.
Lol. Neither is half the programming crap that gets discussed, but you don't hear me complaining. It would appear that medical concerns are a popular topic; I agree, and you don't. It would appear that programming slander/gossip/biz is a popular topic; I disagree, you probably like it.
Move on.
No. Healthcare costs are where they are because the CAPITALISM factor is involved.
With Single Payer Non-Profit, you can expect a 40-50% decrease in total cost to insure. Modeling after Canada's cost/person, a reduction from $1.5TR/250M-people to $1TR/300M-people is possible. That means the 250 million that pay for insurance are paying 1.5 TRILLION a year for shoddy, exclusion rich, insurance when the sum of all Americans, 300 million people, would be paying 1 TRILLION to cover everyone without any exclusions or b.s. trickery.
I've talked to over 40 canadians about how they feel about their single-payer system and NOT A SINGLE ONE agreed with the US-paid-pundits that lie about how canadian's don't like their healthcare. Matter of fact, more than 25% of them laughed when I first asked, knowing that I had been exposed to the US-paid-pundits and required truthful answers.
Capitalism at its finest.... people have needs... you have answers.... gouge em till they stop asking! Or gouge their insurance and drive rates up for everyone.
CAPITALISM DOES NOT BELONG IN MEDICINE. SINGLE PAYER, NON PROFIT. DO IT.
I don't want them to be killed. It would be nice to start life there.
... to produce hybrid technology that would make use of both. I'm not an engineer, but I'm sure some level of hybridization could be produced that would permit a system of prioritization/fragmentation that would make the most efficient use of the hybrid drive. I can even imagine someone developing software that would analyze system performance and make recommendations as to which fragment of the drive (solid/disk) an application ought be run from.
No doubt, a naysayer lacking creativity will tell me its not possible... Please refrain because I will only tell you to stfu and try inventing instead of reproducing.
"Once it was the rule that lots of people were taught to type at school - but most of them were girls and most ended up in low-skilled jobs. As a result typing is seen as a manual worker's skill not worthy of anyone with a brain and a prospect of working smart."
Wtf?!?!?
Also, typing, as with all skills, is improved by having interest in improvement (called humility) and the result of expressing said interest (called practice/study).
This article is worthless; people lacking skills won't care because in truth they lack the humility or interest in realizing growth.
For both ya'll... PS3 are great. I've had one for years, has lasted this whole time, and is playing the new Bad Lieutenant right now on netflix. If you have a media server on your home network, you can access it with the PS3. You can also put in yoru own HDD and not break the warranty. Sony tells you exactly how. That way you can do all kinds of media storing, etc.
PS3 is great. Blu Ray, HD, 3d gaming and movies, media playing, open platform for USB hardware and bluetooth hardware. I know people on slashdot hate sony and for their reasons, and i understand them. I've thought about whether i would buy the next generation... who knows.. but I do appreciate what I have. Great gear.
No.... Thats fox news.
Bing is pure crap. I've used it 5 times (different days) and did searches... every single time the first page of bing results was almost completely irrelevant. In all cases I was disgruntled by the blatant crap and tried the search in google (an engine I trust) and saw desired results in the first 3 hits.
I know its anecdotal, kinda, but for me the experimnt was absolutely conclusive; bing is trash.
Now you're trying to hide the foot in your mouth. Come on, man. There is a story that builds and has drama. But what about having a 'role' and 'playing' it necessitates a 'dramatic arc' anyway? You're just trying too hard to say its not an RPG despite your blatant ignorance to having played it. (If you've played it, please get an IQ test and report back immediately.)
You clearly didn't play it. That's why it doesn't make sense to you.
Go play it.
I wish I had time to respond in full, but I don't right now (pretty busy with life, sorry about that because you deserve more from me).
But what I can say is that the needs I'm talking about are absolutely realistic, encompassing the complexity of society as it exists today and the intricacies that induce participation in competitive roles to fulfill needs. I could brainstorm many points in the fundamental human needs you posted that are not available by social means, especially once one considers relative differences in individuals -- when you take individuals into consideration, one must exercise sympathy in their analysis of what is possible because this is reality, not some utopia where we can assume all people had proper parenting, psychology, and education through their upbringing. We have total buffoons that cannot think around a problem that you or I might do readily -- and yet they are real, and many will echo their limitations through their own progeny.
My point being that, no, our needs are not met by social means, and capitalism *has* pit us against each other for our needs; and even beyond that, if our absolutely realistic structure of society forces people to perceive 'better things' as 'needs', what's the difference? The *reality* is that many will perceive a car as a need (though I would argue that current societal structures in the US almost absolutely require personal vehicles as needs because of the poor design that we live in), even if they could ride a bike or walk. At that point you should be fully in support of expanded social education, to cover the need for people to understand the truth behind what is and isn't an actual need -- the point being that if you wish to achieve a global understanding of needs that are not simply memetic-wants, you will NEED more education that will not arise without social input (aka not spontaneously or by capital gains means).
Maybe I'll find some more time to expand on this with you. I urge you to brainstorm from the list you provided and consider those needs and how some are only achieved by the money that mediates and is sourced by some form of obligate labor (mental or physical).
An example: Your landlord neglected the black mold in your walls that is getting you sick because he gave his daughter 10k (for chemo for her daughter) and can't afford the expensive mold removal. He screws you, but not from malice, only to provide the Protection(care) that is a need on that very list and is not available socially. (Yes, I realize maybe this didn't happen to you, but its a real world example demonstrating how capitalism can pit us against each other.)
... what we know is that this is just another form of information security.
The people who produce false reviews will develop a tool that not only fakes the reviews, but then applies this exact software (in the article) to analyze it, and then provides logical adjustments until this exact software cannot discern the difference between the adjusted outcome or real reviews.
All these cold wars suck. A little honesty and integrity in the world would be great, but when capitalism pits us against each other to survive (not for wants, but for needs), this is exactly what you should expect. I prefer cooperation over competition, when it comes to survival, but if the social environment dictates that I must do bad to survive, I must survive.
If you respond, please don't be the shallow minded bum that thinks there isn't a causal relationship between what I just said and how people fake reviews (for revenue).
I recall the conversation being you defending the flawed 'known' solution (which was just shown as flawed in the article) against the idea of innovation to remove security holes from the tech. If you read my other posts on this topic, where I brainstorm and urge forward progress in thinking, you'd notice that my blinders are fully removed and it is the assumptions of those who think they 'know' the limitations of what is possible (as you are) that are in defense of flawed products that (in my opinion) could use a bit more work.
There is no need for the computer to have access to a battery in a way that would modify it. If the firmware is flawed, that should arise in testing, and if still flawed, could be fixed through recall and/or in-store flashing. Or the chips on the battery can be internal, while reporting the necessary information (total charge, time left) via analog or digital display that does not have 2-way communication with the OS. But nah... You've engineered plants, so you *know* its not possible to do it without OS access to the firmware... Good luck with that, as I said before. Your merits in plant engineering appear insignificant when you defend flaws in the face of urges to innovate.
I saw that happen on The Sims while my sim was sleeping.... It was forgiven.
Also, they saw that 'you' left behind a bit of evidence that you'd been there -- thus exacerbating the overrreaction to the non-harming foul -- thus meaning that guy needs YEARS in prison.
yes... copies of 1s and 0s... and of restricted truth...
Like I said. NO HARM, NO FOUL.
Its not that complicated. Science magazine is between 75-150 dollars per year and you get a physical copy every other week mailed to your door.
Ads? Yes. Huge popularity? Yes. (I realize these two factors play a role in the reduced price).
Some of the 3-5k/year journals out there might find far more readership, and advertising sponsors, if they tried a reduced price model for a while. My band (in sig) operates at a slight loss, but the goal is to gain enough exposure to overcome that problem (and to ultimately make money so we can fund charities, if you listen to our tunes you'd understand). Its an investment (and on the personal level, its totally worth it for the awesome life experience.).
So he downloaded tons of scientific truth, and took extraordinary means to do so.
There is a saying... "no harm, no foul." The point of the saying being that even though an action may have occurred that is of some infringing nature, if there is no harm, the infringement can be easily forgiven.
I just want to know why MIT is holding the truth so tightly and only dictating its implications through press release and patented products; the truth should be free.
You're not really going to try, at all, are you? You're talking about what we already know, and ignoring the fact that it is reckless/vulnerable for convenience.
Meh... you can scan all my other posts on this topic for some inspiration. Real inventors have ideas, and then make it reality -- they don't look at reality and accept it as is.
All you said was 'change the locks'. That's pretty lame.
You could still have internal chips and firmware... my point is that the communication directly to the computer/os is unecessary, and that a hardware display would suffice for showing the amount of battery left. But in this case, the backdoor was built, and the backdoor was broken. I'm saying that people should try to think around the doors, but I guess you missed that point.
I never said for controlling charge and discharge, that would be something that would require absolutely no communication with the actual computer, thus the 'door' would not exist anyway.
What i'm talking about is an analog readout that is physically connected to the battery and simply reports the amount in it. Hell, it could even be a digital display, but the point being that it doesn't communicate with the computer/os, but rather directly to a small display somewhere on your device.
oh.. but that's me not having a clue, huh... yeah... look where 'not trying new things' got apple. keep those blinders on, you'll fare well as a peon.
So instead of spending an extra 6 months and some more people invested in a debug (so you could have a reliable finalized product that requires no patches), you just open doors and assume that only you will be the one going through it... yeah.... smart... oh wait.. we're talking about this for a reason.
The big point here is beyond batteries. And the solution will not come from shortsighted, uninventive, run-of-the-mill engineers and companies. The solutions will not be something you've seen before, but may involve things you've seen before.
quick answer: the firmware updates should be administered by physical port access by an in-store support clerk using a small handheld device that is in no way connected to the internet or any network. (10 second idea, and maybe even a good one!)