What the pope already said. I don't see any AdChoices - or any other adverts. And, I have never used the opt-out here at slashdot to hide advertisements. All blocking is done on my router, or my computer, or in my browser. I don't see ads, unless and until I do a search for a product. I don't see it on Gmail, G+, iGoogle, or anywhere else. You gotta get with the times - every tool that I use to block ads has been discussed many times right here on slashdot.
Hosts file . . . google that too. When you're finished, you might want to google for instructions on your router, to block unwanted sites. It's not that hard, it only takes a bit of reading in most cases. If you really want to fine tune your blocked sites list, install something like Tomato on your router - or buy a router on which you can install Tomato, or DD-WRT, or Open-WRT. Of course, if you're not a poor working chump, you could always opt for a commercial grade router, and save the bother of flashing Tomato.
That advantage of setting rules on your router is, you protect everyone in your home or business. Rules on your own machine are good, but do nothing for the other 1 to 20 machines that use your connection.
You actually use the apps? I don't have a single one. All that I use Facebook for, is to look at "important" people's walls. I've friended the "most important", so most of the time, I don't even need to look at their walls. But, I sure as hell don't enable any apps, so that the "developer" can browse through my information!
It's generally more secure than the desktop releases, due to "default" settings. Even if it's not more secure, the wife and kids don't know how to navigate in it, so they won't even want to get on it. I ran Win2003 for a good while, converted to desktop use. It was actually pretty nice, with all the lockdowns in place.
I suppose this is where you'll tell me that I should look at Win7. I have. It's a definite improvement over XP and Vista, but it's not much of an improvement over 2003.
That's part of that censorship deal. Big brother doesn't come home, and TELL YOU that he's done a hard day's work of killing people! You have to figure it out on your own. So, if you don't look at the blood tracked across the living room, you might think that it's just mud or something.
No way in hell are people - myself included - going to think that a slow computer is better than any alternative.
I've already dropped a couple remarks about Linux. Let's just suppose for a moment that Linux desktops are targeted in the next several months, and our virus environment gets to be as bad as Windows. Will I install a resource hog like McAfee or Symantec? No way. Instead, I'll shut down services, encrypt everything, only use HTTPS - you know, all those "best practices" things that the real security experts recommend anyway.
If I were to go back to Windows tomorrow, I would install a Windows Server (pirated edition), convert it to workstation, and run with almost all the default security in place.
I would rather run naked on the internet, than to suffer an antivirus that consumes half of my system resources. (Alright, I'll put on a pair of briefs, there are children on the internet!)
Not a bad question. Personally, I haven't looked at Norton or McAfee seriously in about 5 years. I USED to know which ones used how much memory, and how much they slowed down a machine. But, I upgraded to Linux, and haven't looked back. Maybe I should look again? Maybe - if I get really bored, or I get nostalgic for some good bondage and masochism.
That's all well and good, for you collectivists. (Obviously, you are one, or you wouldn't have thought of that argument.) Now - what about individualists? Minorities? Are minorities part of the collective? Who runs this collective, anyway? Does being a congressman put you in charge of the collective?
Stuff it up your collective asses. Free speech means a man can speak his mind, and not give a small damn what liberals, conservatives, or even libertarians might think. Individual men and women enjoy this right, not "mankind" mouthing some doctrine that you happen to approve of.
Sorry, I'm not going to get all academic here, and start searching for references - but I can't see that any royalty ever had much to do with "enlightenment". Royalty was always conservative in the true sense of the word, rather than the common political sense that we see today. Royalty didn't voluntarily decide that it would be nice to free the serfs. Instead, the serfs held royalty at sword point, and demanded freedom.
Ehh. Enlightenment. Whatever.
However, I do belong to the school of thought that most upheavals in history were caused by climate change. The authors are on the right track, but their biases seem to be pushing them askew.
The New Reformed Church of Jesus Christ the Vengeful Redeemer operates a summer camp in Greenville, Mississippi. But, the church is actually located across the river, in Arkansas. And, yes, all the kids at summer camp happen to look like muppets. That is one of the dangers of inbreeding, after all. Where do you think Jim Henson got all his ideas, anyway?
Better be careful. There are some militant liberals around here. Talking like that can get you in trouble with the though police. I might agree with you, but is it worth risking being sent to Guantanamo for reeducation? I don't think so. Just keep your anti-gay thoughts to yourself, man, or they'll have you brainwashed within the year!
ROFLMAO, smartass. I'm not awash in debt. I manage to make ends meet. I'm atypical, alright? I'm not quite as tight as my son, or my father in law was - I can't pinch a penny hard enough to get tears from the portrait. But, I'm not in debt. If I lost my job tomorrow, I needn't worry about making car payments, house payments, credit card payments, tuition payments, 2nd mortgage payments - none of that.
So, yes, I can do basic math. If I make ten dollars, I spend a little less than ten dollars. If I make a thousand dollars, I spend a little less than 900 dollars. MOST Americans make ten dollars and spend twelve. When they make a thousand, they spend 1100, and sign a note for another 500. Basic math, son, very basic. You can't spend more than you make.
Most places that require years and years of zoning law battles are already fairly saturated. That portion of our nation which has no coverage isn't going to put many obstacles in the way of new towers. I have fifteen acres, and secondary highway access to it, if anyone wants to put up a tower. No zoning to worry about, just send me a notice, and I'll get the building permit! The single minor hurdle will be getting the aviation people to sign off, but since I'm miles away from the two nearest airports, that won't be a problem either.
Uhhhhh - twenty billion dollar loss leaders? Alright - if you say so. Let me look again, and count those zeros. Yep. Twenty Billion - not million. Oh-kayyy - loss leaders. If you know what you're talking about, they are taking one HELL of a gamble!
I suspect that those phones are going to be sold at some kind of markup. Maybe only a slight markup, but a markup all the same. No company can afford to take a loss on that much investment capital. Especially considering the number of returned phones, for whatever reason.
Americans can't do math, in general. That's why the banks got "to big to fail", and that's why the telcos are getting "to big to fail". If Americans could do simple math, the corporate world would have a whole different landscape. And, we wouldn't see our industry being outsourced and/or exported. If Americans could do simple math, there never would have been a housing bubble. Alas - we've been dumbed down to the point that almost no one realizes what those smart phones actually cost. That, despite Microsoft spouting gibberish about "total cost of ownership" for a product that they don't sell anyway. (This product is licensed, not sold.)
It's the outbound queues. Your torrent client floods your own router with outbound packets, and your game packets can't get out. As I mentioned above, I use Toastman's QOS rules, which are rather - complicated I guess is the right term.
I can be gaming, and all three of my sons can start a torrent, or any other kind of download, but they don't affect me. In effect, I've cut the top 5% of my own bandwidth, then the QOS rules put everything into classes. ANYTHING that exceeds 512k is put into "bulk", and the outgoing packets are severely throttled to ensure that interactive stuff isn't impaired. The router doesn't care what protocol is being used, it doesn't care that other priorities might have put that larger transfer into a higher class - the instant anything asks for transfers larger than 512 k, it gets booted into "bulk".
It gets complicated, and you simply can't set the rules up on a stock router from any of the manufacturers. (well, not on a "consumer" class router, anyway)
I can almost assure you that your ISP isn't doing that to you - it's happening right there, inside your own network! (I say, "almost" - there do seem to be some credible accounts of ISP's doing what you say!)
Actually - some limited throttling makes sense, out there in the infrastructure. Not so much for the purpose of limiting stuff, but for the purpose of prioritizing important stuff.
Some things really ARE more important than finishing a 4 gig movie download 3 minutes sooner. I mean, you'll get your movie. The difference between finishing the download at 12:15 or 12:18 means nothing, really. But, even if/when the ISP isn't over subscribed, it makes sense that interactive stuff gets priority. VoIP is useless unless it has a priority over bulk transfers. Gaming is impossible, without a higher priority than torrents. There really ARE reasonable prioritization schemes, that don't involve ripping people off for bandwidth that you can't supply.
Have you ever looked at Toastman's QOS rules? An ISP that doesn't do ANY QOS scheduling is actually irresponsible, and I think that Toastman gets it right.
Wow. Is your name really Mindfuck? obviously, you don't like whites, males, or middle class - especially if they are American. The personification of privilege, you say? Not exactly. I've been "privileged" to work hard, all of my life, to get where I am. And, I am nowhere. Family, home, old cars, no money, and no retirement. But, that's alright. Ghetto people who have never worked a day in their lives have just as much as I do. Family, home, old cars, no money, and no retirement.
Kindly fuck off and die, Mindfuck. You make it sound like being a white male in American is equivalent to being a king in some backwater cesspool. Where did you say you are from? Pakistan, maybe?
"no real evidence of any sort of high-level conspiracy"
The CIA made lots of mistakes. The single worst mistake they made, was when they allowed the White House to influence their reports, and even to edit the data to support political agendas. The CIA could well have denied some of the bullshit gushing from the White House. While they couldn't get away with using the direct language that I tend to use, there are many ways to tell the world that the White House is lying, while making it sound like you really respect the wisdom of the Pres, VP, etc.
I can forgive everything the CIA did and did not do - except for allowing Bush and Cheney to hijack the CIA's intelligence. They should have found a way to assert themselves, and to assert the real information.
I don't know, to be honest. I've only read enough to know that the raptors use UV light to find their prey. I BELIEVE that they actually see in UV, but it's possible that they only see that visible light glow. Google?
Pseudoscience, sure. But, your anecdotal evidence doesn't make science either. Did you volunteer for any studies? Are you saying that you can see ultraviolet, or are you just complaining that you weren't part of any test group?
As I see it, net neutrality doesn't preclude some throttling. In my house, we have a router, with Tomato installed, using Toastman's QOS rules. I can understand, and support, the very same throttling at the ISP level.
But, what I see is, the big telcos aren't interested in fair sharing, so much as they are interested in maximizing profits. How 'bout those SMS messages? They can be, and often are, more expensive than an entire data plan. Why? It's been shown many times that those messages use an insignificant percentage of actual bandwidth. Why do they cost so much? Only because the telcos can get away with it, and most consumers are gullible.
Slashdot Mirror
What the pope already said. I don't see any AdChoices - or any other adverts. And, I have never used the opt-out here at slashdot to hide advertisements. All blocking is done on my router, or my computer, or in my browser. I don't see ads, unless and until I do a search for a product. I don't see it on Gmail, G+, iGoogle, or anywhere else. You gotta get with the times - every tool that I use to block ads has been discussed many times right here on slashdot.
Hosts file . . . google that too. When you're finished, you might want to google for instructions on your router, to block unwanted sites. It's not that hard, it only takes a bit of reading in most cases. If you really want to fine tune your blocked sites list, install something like Tomato on your router - or buy a router on which you can install Tomato, or DD-WRT, or Open-WRT. Of course, if you're not a poor working chump, you could always opt for a commercial grade router, and save the bother of flashing Tomato.
That advantage of setting rules on your router is, you protect everyone in your home or business. Rules on your own machine are good, but do nothing for the other 1 to 20 machines that use your connection.
You actually use the apps? I don't have a single one. All that I use Facebook for, is to look at "important" people's walls. I've friended the "most important", so most of the time, I don't even need to look at their walls. But, I sure as hell don't enable any apps, so that the "developer" can browse through my information!
It's generally more secure than the desktop releases, due to "default" settings. Even if it's not more secure, the wife and kids don't know how to navigate in it, so they won't even want to get on it. I ran Win2003 for a good while, converted to desktop use. It was actually pretty nice, with all the lockdowns in place.
I suppose this is where you'll tell me that I should look at Win7. I have. It's a definite improvement over XP and Vista, but it's not much of an improvement over 2003.
That's part of that censorship deal. Big brother doesn't come home, and TELL YOU that he's done a hard day's work of killing people! You have to figure it out on your own. So, if you don't look at the blood tracked across the living room, you might think that it's just mud or something.
No way in hell are people - myself included - going to think that a slow computer is better than any alternative.
I've already dropped a couple remarks about Linux. Let's just suppose for a moment that Linux desktops are targeted in the next several months, and our virus environment gets to be as bad as Windows. Will I install a resource hog like McAfee or Symantec? No way. Instead, I'll shut down services, encrypt everything, only use HTTPS - you know, all those "best practices" things that the real security experts recommend anyway.
If I were to go back to Windows tomorrow, I would install a Windows Server (pirated edition), convert it to workstation, and run with almost all the default security in place.
I would rather run naked on the internet, than to suffer an antivirus that consumes half of my system resources. (Alright, I'll put on a pair of briefs, there are children on the internet!)
What, you think the TSA doesn't constantly nag congress for all of that stuff? Or - you don't think that we pay for it when congress authorizes it?
Not a bad question. Personally, I haven't looked at Norton or McAfee seriously in about 5 years. I USED to know which ones used how much memory, and how much they slowed down a machine. But, I upgraded to Linux, and haven't looked back. Maybe I should look again? Maybe - if I get really bored, or I get nostalgic for some good bondage and masochism.
Just upgrade your computer. Introduce your hardware to Linux - it's a match made in heaven.
dd if=urandom of=sda1
reboot
install
That's all well and good, for you collectivists. (Obviously, you are one, or you wouldn't have thought of that argument.) Now - what about individualists? Minorities? Are minorities part of the collective? Who runs this collective, anyway? Does being a congressman put you in charge of the collective?
Stuff it up your collective asses. Free speech means a man can speak his mind, and not give a small damn what liberals, conservatives, or even libertarians might think. Individual men and women enjoy this right, not "mankind" mouthing some doctrine that you happen to approve of.
Your heading/statement, I agree with.
Sorry, I'm not going to get all academic here, and start searching for references - but I can't see that any royalty ever had much to do with "enlightenment". Royalty was always conservative in the true sense of the word, rather than the common political sense that we see today. Royalty didn't voluntarily decide that it would be nice to free the serfs. Instead, the serfs held royalty at sword point, and demanded freedom.
Ehh. Enlightenment. Whatever.
However, I do belong to the school of thought that most upheavals in history were caused by climate change. The authors are on the right track, but their biases seem to be pushing them askew.
The New Reformed Church of Jesus Christ the Vengeful Redeemer operates a summer camp in Greenville, Mississippi. But, the church is actually located across the river, in Arkansas. And, yes, all the kids at summer camp happen to look like muppets. That is one of the dangers of inbreeding, after all. Where do you think Jim Henson got all his ideas, anyway?
Better be careful. There are some militant liberals around here. Talking like that can get you in trouble with the though police. I might agree with you, but is it worth risking being sent to Guantanamo for reeducation? I don't think so. Just keep your anti-gay thoughts to yourself, man, or they'll have you brainwashed within the year!
Because they have money. Money talks, and bullshit walks. That is the name of the game in Washington.
ROFLMAO, smartass. I'm not awash in debt. I manage to make ends meet. I'm atypical, alright? I'm not quite as tight as my son, or my father in law was - I can't pinch a penny hard enough to get tears from the portrait. But, I'm not in debt. If I lost my job tomorrow, I needn't worry about making car payments, house payments, credit card payments, tuition payments, 2nd mortgage payments - none of that.
So, yes, I can do basic math. If I make ten dollars, I spend a little less than ten dollars. If I make a thousand dollars, I spend a little less than 900 dollars. MOST Americans make ten dollars and spend twelve. When they make a thousand, they spend 1100, and sign a note for another 500. Basic math, son, very basic. You can't spend more than you make.
Most places that require years and years of zoning law battles are already fairly saturated. That portion of our nation which has no coverage isn't going to put many obstacles in the way of new towers. I have fifteen acres, and secondary highway access to it, if anyone wants to put up a tower. No zoning to worry about, just send me a notice, and I'll get the building permit! The single minor hurdle will be getting the aviation people to sign off, but since I'm miles away from the two nearest airports, that won't be a problem either.
Uhhhhh - twenty billion dollar loss leaders? Alright - if you say so. Let me look again, and count those zeros. Yep. Twenty Billion - not million. Oh-kayyy - loss leaders. If you know what you're talking about, they are taking one HELL of a gamble!
I suspect that those phones are going to be sold at some kind of markup. Maybe only a slight markup, but a markup all the same. No company can afford to take a loss on that much investment capital. Especially considering the number of returned phones, for whatever reason.
Americans can't do math, in general. That's why the banks got "to big to fail", and that's why the telcos are getting "to big to fail". If Americans could do simple math, the corporate world would have a whole different landscape. And, we wouldn't see our industry being outsourced and/or exported. If Americans could do simple math, there never would have been a housing bubble. Alas - we've been dumbed down to the point that almost no one realizes what those smart phones actually cost. That, despite Microsoft spouting gibberish about "total cost of ownership" for a product that they don't sell anyway. (This product is licensed, not sold.)
It's just embarrassing, isn't it?
It's the outbound queues. Your torrent client floods your own router with outbound packets, and your game packets can't get out. As I mentioned above, I use Toastman's QOS rules, which are rather - complicated I guess is the right term.
I can be gaming, and all three of my sons can start a torrent, or any other kind of download, but they don't affect me. In effect, I've cut the top 5% of my own bandwidth, then the QOS rules put everything into classes. ANYTHING that exceeds 512k is put into "bulk", and the outgoing packets are severely throttled to ensure that interactive stuff isn't impaired. The router doesn't care what protocol is being used, it doesn't care that other priorities might have put that larger transfer into a higher class - the instant anything asks for transfers larger than 512 k, it gets booted into "bulk".
It gets complicated, and you simply can't set the rules up on a stock router from any of the manufacturers. (well, not on a "consumer" class router, anyway)
Take a look here, if you have the time: http://www.linksysinfo.org/index.php?threads/using-qos-tutorial-and-discussion.28349/
Or, if you don't have the time, maybe you can bookmark it for future reference.
I can almost assure you that your ISP isn't doing that to you - it's happening right there, inside your own network! (I say, "almost" - there do seem to be some credible accounts of ISP's doing what you say!)
Actually - some limited throttling makes sense, out there in the infrastructure. Not so much for the purpose of limiting stuff, but for the purpose of prioritizing important stuff.
Some things really ARE more important than finishing a 4 gig movie download 3 minutes sooner. I mean, you'll get your movie. The difference between finishing the download at 12:15 or 12:18 means nothing, really. But, even if/when the ISP isn't over subscribed, it makes sense that interactive stuff gets priority. VoIP is useless unless it has a priority over bulk transfers. Gaming is impossible, without a higher priority than torrents. There really ARE reasonable prioritization schemes, that don't involve ripping people off for bandwidth that you can't supply.
Have you ever looked at Toastman's QOS rules? An ISP that doesn't do ANY QOS scheduling is actually irresponsible, and I think that Toastman gets it right.
Wow. Is your name really Mindfuck? obviously, you don't like whites, males, or middle class - especially if they are American. The personification of privilege, you say? Not exactly. I've been "privileged" to work hard, all of my life, to get where I am. And, I am nowhere. Family, home, old cars, no money, and no retirement. But, that's alright. Ghetto people who have never worked a day in their lives have just as much as I do. Family, home, old cars, no money, and no retirement.
Kindly fuck off and die, Mindfuck. You make it sound like being a white male in American is equivalent to being a king in some backwater cesspool. Where did you say you are from? Pakistan, maybe?
"no real evidence of any sort of high-level conspiracy"
The CIA made lots of mistakes. The single worst mistake they made, was when they allowed the White House to influence their reports, and even to edit the data to support political agendas. The CIA could well have denied some of the bullshit gushing from the White House. While they couldn't get away with using the direct language that I tend to use, there are many ways to tell the world that the White House is lying, while making it sound like you really respect the wisdom of the Pres, VP, etc.
I can forgive everything the CIA did and did not do - except for allowing Bush and Cheney to hijack the CIA's intelligence. They should have found a way to assert themselves, and to assert the real information.
I don't know, to be honest. I've only read enough to know that the raptors use UV light to find their prey. I BELIEVE that they actually see in UV, but it's possible that they only see that visible light glow. Google?
Pseudoscience, sure. But, your anecdotal evidence doesn't make science either. Did you volunteer for any studies? Are you saying that you can see ultraviolet, or are you just complaining that you weren't part of any test group?
As I see it, net neutrality doesn't preclude some throttling. In my house, we have a router, with Tomato installed, using Toastman's QOS rules. I can understand, and support, the very same throttling at the ISP level.
But, what I see is, the big telcos aren't interested in fair sharing, so much as they are interested in maximizing profits. How 'bout those SMS messages? They can be, and often are, more expensive than an entire data plan. Why? It's been shown many times that those messages use an insignificant percentage of actual bandwidth. Why do they cost so much? Only because the telcos can get away with it, and most consumers are gullible.