They've been punked by Realtors and real estate developers, as well.
Where Google Maps used to show the names (whether formally-adopted or not) of long-established neighborhoods in San Diego, it now shows the names of new condo complexes.
These are not neighborhoods!
- Spruce Canyon Townhomes - India Street Lofts - Southpark Townhomes - Mississippi Street Condos - The Village in University Heights - Florida Gardens - Fashion Walk Condos - Judson St Condos
They are shown in the same typeface, size, and color as ACTUAL neighborhoods:
- Linda Vista - Little Italy - Hillcrest - University Heights
I do not want to screw around taking photos of barcodes with my phone.
It's enough that now I go to Whole Foods and the isles are overrun with slow-ass "pickers" screwing around taking photos of barcodes with their phones.
Now the homeless can just move indoors at the 7-11s! Great community support move by 7-11!
Every 7-11 in my area is a magnet for homeless and petty criminals. Hot spots for drug sales, fencing stolen goods, and the ever-present Shakey's Bike Shop popups. (Locations all over town, on a street corner near you!)
My local 7-11 is "cooperating" with the police and the clerks are supposed to report loitering and suspicious activities. But it seems that they don't, or it's just an impossible task. It's on the first floor of a condo building, and the HOA keeps fining them, but to no avail. The HOA does not want them, but it is a commercial "condo unit". (Owner rents to the 7-11 franchise.)
How do you get a 7-11 to move out of your neighborhood?
P.S. I have nothing against the homeless. It's just their condition, and public efforts to help are thin and ineffective. In particular, it is really shitty how we treat disabled veterans, so many of whom wind up on the streets. The homeless are as often the victims of crime than perpetrators - there is a criminal element that preys on the homeless community, and so unfortunately that means that any business is wise to shoo them away. If a location becomes a known hangout, then the drug dealers and fences and sellers of stolen goods are sure to follow, in order to victimize them.
As others have stated, it's nothing you're likely to discover.
It would be absolutely silly to establish a nailed-up (or even periodic) command-and-control connection. Too easy to find.
It would likely do something at a per-determined time, after so many hours of operation, etc. to insure it passed all pre-installation checks. Maybe e.g. on the 2nd firmware update, add a little something "extra".
Curious if your servers have a separate Ethernet port for the management processor? If not, that's a major security concern. I read in an article in EDN that many do not.
Haven't dealt with servers in a long time - I am a software developer. Last time I did, they were IBM servers, in the early 2000's. At the time, it was an optional management board, and had it's own Ethernet port. (As well as serial, for connecting to a modem.) If you disconnect the Ethernet cable from the management board, or remove the management board, you can be pretty sure there's no command-and-control implemented by that route!;)
Anyway, from what I get from the Bloomberg article, you're looking for a small surface-mount component that looks like a capacitor, choke, filter, resister, transistor. A very small component that looks exactly like all the other very small components littering the circuit board.
I speculate it might be inductively coupled to an I2C bus, etc. through some clever circuit board mis-design.
Gotta say, though, "cool do', bro!". Very Tesla-ish!
I "retired" from ham radio many years ago, but got my Novice license in junior high in the late 60's, and then got the General and Advanced while in high school.
As I recall, the ARRL didn't have much of a different reputation back in the 70's. They've always presumed to speak for the majority of American hams, even though the majority of American hams have never been members.
I think the apple does not fall far from the tree.
Wait... how the hell did Instagram get my location data?!
If you want to tag the location of a post, it uses location data to show a list of nearby locations. It will ask permission the first time you do it.
Now they want to track your location, even when your phone is in your pocket, and not using the app. You will need to give permission to "use location data while not using hte app".
There are relevant ads? Haven't seen any relevant ads. Lots of ads, all irrelevant.
They claim, of course, they are trying to make them relevant.
EVERYBODY trying to provide "relevant" ads, please get this: a zillion ads for a one-time purchase I made six months ago, and probably won't make again for several years is not "relevant".
I am tired of ads for large fixed diesel engines.
(And, no, I did not recently buy a large fixed diesel engine. A friend was interested in the possibility of converting one to marine use. Now I am inundated with Caterpillar ads. They gave up on the fixed engines, though, now they are trying to sell me graders. This must be worth even more than mesothelioma.)
The default location sharing (only when the app is open and screen not locked) is fine, and of course can be disabled.It helps tag locations easily.
If you are paranoid, you can always disable location sharing, and still search for locations that you might want to tag.
I didn't sign up for Instagram to be deluged with marking popups. Nor for Facebook to accumulate a database of their user's whereabouts and comings and goings. Nor to create a phantom Facebook profile if I don't have a Facebook account.
You can "explore what's around you" with the current location sharing. If my phone is in my pocket, I don't want/need any "help" "exploring".
I guess this is the beginning of the end of Instagram. It will be absorbed by The Zukerborg.
Why was this ever on the Play Store in the first place? Why do a small but vocal minority of Android users insist on being able to fsck with their phone's OS, and then complain wah-wah-wah when they are hacked?
Hmmmm... false memories, the Wayback Machine says I'm wrong, and the cam continued to operate through mid-2004 when the domain was sold and then after for I think a couple years.
WTF war did we have around that time? Scheduling that Alzheimer's screening....
Anyway, the camera "went dead" right after we got into some major conflict... The timing was close enough, I just said to myself "maybe not a good idea to give the world a PTZ view of San Diego Bay right now..."
( But, then, I've heard rumors about a Russian spy who lived on Pt. Loma that the sailors would wave to anyway... Probably had something to do with this: https://www.wired.com/2015/07/... )
Wayback only has the static views that were served if you weren't using Netscape browser.:(
>Does Microsoft still let you use your sub-domain?
No, and they never did.
To be clear, I sold the domain to a third party (for $36K, now that I recall, not $28K - I split the $36K 50/50 with my handshake partner), and then a year later they sold it to Microsoft for an undisclosed sum.
I hadn't thought to ask Microsoft to let me continue to use the subdomain! I just went ahead and registered sandiegobaycam.org. Microsoft bought live.net from the party I sold it to, I didn't feel I had any right to it. While the ski sites guy had it, it was a good mutual agreement that helped draw users. The site was rated very highly "above the fold" for "San Diego" for a number of years - typically just below the San Diego Zoo.
Fun fact: the camera "went dead" right after 9/11. I figured it wasn't a good idea at the time to try to revive or replace it. Howard had paid for a nice Panasonic PTZ camera and dome, and viewers could manipulate the camera to look around San Diego Bay, including aircraft carriers, North Island Naval Air Station, Lindbergh Field, etc. etc. I didn't want to buy a new camera, Howard was out of the deal, I just let it ride.
It was fun to have the camera while it lasted. I got "fan mail" from employees at the Naval Oceanic Systems Center, who couldn't see outside from their cubicles. And always appreciation from Navy families who could watch the carriers when they came in and out of the bay.
Subsequently, I've moved, and no longer have that expansive view of San Diego Bay.:(
>$28k is a lot in that case, since no one in the history of the WWW has ever mis-typed '.net' when they meant '.com'.:-)
Actually, I was wrong, it was $36K. I split it 50/50 with Howard, so I got $18K, the 8 stuck in my mind...
Presumably, Microsoft paid more than $36K a year later.
It's certainly POSSIBLE that the buyer knew there were plans in the works. I was and still am baffled why they paid $36K to put ski cams on a domain that doesn't suggest ski cams.;)
Still, I think fair for all. I can't imagine the buyer made a huge windfall given that it's just a secondary protective domain for Microsoft.
I was the original registrant of live.net. Original registration cost: $0. It was registered by email. (I later had to start paying $35/year to maintain the registration.) Sadly, live.com had been taken a few months prior, but live.net would do, and I wrote a convincing argument for the use of the.net. (At the time,.net domains had to justify some use related to "network infrastructure".)
At the time, I was operating the San Diego Baycam as a hobby. It was hosted at a local ISP gratis and was just using a subdomain of the ISP. It ran on a spare Spark 5 that they had.
At some point, I was contacted by a nice guy named Howard. Howard had backed some early satellite broadcasting venture that didn't make it. Howard had lots of ideas, which tended to be a just bit too early for the times or technology. He now had an idea to create a network of outdoor cams world wide. We talked, we met, we shook hands.
I registered live.net under a gentleman's agreement on behalf of a business to-be-formed with Howard, and moved the Baycam to live.net. The gentleman's agreement was vague. We would do some exploration, and set up a company at some time in the future with some kind of equity split. In the mean time, I would continue to develop the feeder and server software I'd written for the Baycam. (I thought it pretty clever at the time - the server used a circular shared memory buffer, so that multiple viewers were just pulling frames from the buffer. The "video" was motion JPEG using now-obsolete "server push". But no thoughts of how it might scale beyond one server, LOL.)
I registered the domain myself, since the business hadn't been formed. Of course, this is where a LOT of domain registrations go bad! Become a ticking time-bomb, actually. My advice to anyone who needs to register a domain has always been: 1. Don't let anybody register a domain for you - do it yourself. 2. Registrar, DNS, and hosting have to be with separate companies.
The business-to-be never happened. Howard went on to do other things (vegas.com). The Baycam hummed along.
One day, I got an offer out of the blue to buy the domain live.net for $28,000. No idea where they got that figure from - you'd think a buyer would start lower than that... The buyer had a bunch of ski-related travel sites, all registered under disparate domain names. He said he wanted to integrate his ski cams and ski sites under a single domain. It seemed odd to me, because the name live.net had nothing to do with skiing, but whatever....
So, I contacted Howard and asked if he was interested in selling the domain, and splitting the profit. (I'm a nice guy, he's a nice guy...)
We did, escrowing it through escrow.com flawlessly. escrow.com disbursed equal checks to myself and Howard. So, so far, I'm a nice guy, Howard's a nice guy, escrow.com are nice guys.
The buyer put up his ski sites and ski cams, and as part of our agreement, I continued to operate the San Diego Baycam on a subdomain.
Fast forward a year, and I was checking the site. My browser was redirected to Microsoft. I sent off a panicked email to the buyer that his domain had somehow been "hijacked", and the hijacker was forwarding to Microsoft! The domain registration had been changed, and it had private registration.
The buyer emailed me back, no there was no hijacking! He's sold the domain to Microsoft. For how much, I know not.
Shortly thereafter, Microsoft announced their Live rebranding...
Had the buyer known a year in advance of the Live rebranding? I've often wondered. It was a year, and they actually had a network of ski sites and ski cams. It wasn't the best name for a network of ski sites and ski cams. I imagine he did not know. live.com was the primary domain for the rebranding, live.net was presumably "protective" to catch mis-types of TLD. The big question mark has always been the generosity of the unsolicited offer. (This was long enough ago that $28,000 was a lot for
In the U.S. we have the Americans with Disabilities Act, which I'm sure applies here. Schools have to make reasonable accommodations for disabilities.
A student/parent should be able to ask for a reasonable accommodation if public speaking is likely to trigger some serious negative outcome, legitimately CAN'T reasonably perform the task (e.g. severe speech impediment, etc.) etc.
But this seems to be asking for more. That it makes a student "uncomfortable" doesn't rise to the need for reasonable accommodation.
I wonder how many of these students have no problem at all making YouTube Videos, live-streaming on their favorite social platform, or entertaining their friends in person with their latest misadventures?
Maybe a remedial program to "bridge" these "skills" to the valuable skill of public speaking...
Why do people expect increment phone updates to be "exciting"?
The last "exciting" things in telephony were:
- the smart phone - the cell phone - touchtone dialing ("bling" exciting, not "functional" exciting, except it eventually brought us the boring experience of "response trees", which is exciting in it's boringness) - The trans-Atlantic cable - Direct-dialed long-distance - The trans-continental cable
Slashdot Mirror
BTW, while some of these are large, sprawling developments, many are not - some are a single small building.
It looks like some of society's nastiest vultures (sorry Realtors and real estate developers...) have found a loophole.
They've been punked by Realtors and real estate developers, as well.
Where Google Maps used to show the names (whether formally-adopted or not) of long-established neighborhoods in San Diego, it now shows the names of new condo complexes.
These are not neighborhoods!
- Spruce Canyon Townhomes
- India Street Lofts
- Southpark Townhomes
- Mississippi Street Condos
- The Village in University Heights
- Florida Gardens
- Fashion Walk Condos
- Judson St Condos
They are shown in the same typeface, size, and color as ACTUAL neighborhoods:
- Linda Vista
- Little Italy
- Hillcrest
- University Heights
etc.
Google.... you been punked!
Bringing multi-colored toilet paper back to bathrooms everywhere!
Oh. You "scan" with your phone.
Sorry, but: no.
I do not want to screw around taking photos of barcodes with my phone.
It's enough that now I go to Whole Foods and the isles are overrun with slow-ass "pickers" screwing around taking photos of barcodes with their phones.
As stated above, it's not at all like Amazon.
So, they are putting in a self-checkout station.
Just like Ralph's (and probably every other supermarket chain) has, and CVS had and abandoned.
Now the homeless can just move indoors at the 7-11s! Great community support move by 7-11!
Every 7-11 in my area is a magnet for homeless and petty criminals. Hot spots for drug sales, fencing stolen goods, and the ever-present Shakey's Bike Shop popups. (Locations all over town, on a street corner near you!)
My local 7-11 is "cooperating" with the police and the clerks are supposed to report loitering and suspicious activities. But it seems that they don't, or it's just an impossible task. It's on the first floor of a condo building, and the HOA keeps fining them, but to no avail. The HOA does not want them, but it is a commercial "condo unit". (Owner rents to the 7-11 franchise.)
How do you get a 7-11 to move out of your neighborhood?
P.S. I have nothing against the homeless. It's just their condition, and public efforts to help are thin and ineffective. In particular, it is really shitty how we treat disabled veterans, so many of whom wind up on the streets. The homeless are as often the victims of crime than perpetrators - there is a criminal element that preys on the homeless community, and so unfortunately that means that any business is wise to shoo them away. If a location becomes a known hangout, then the drug dealers and fences and sellers of stolen goods are sure to follow, in order to victimize them.
Worker's Compensation. Or lack thereof.
As others have stated, it's nothing you're likely to discover.
It would be absolutely silly to establish a nailed-up (or even periodic) command-and-control connection. Too easy to find.
It would likely do something at a per-determined time, after so many hours of operation, etc. to insure it passed all pre-installation checks. Maybe e.g. on the 2nd firmware update, add a little something "extra".
Curious if your servers have a separate Ethernet port for the management processor? If not, that's a major security concern. I read in an article in EDN that many do not.
Haven't dealt with servers in a long time - I am a software developer. Last time I did, they were IBM servers, in the early 2000's. At the time, it was an optional management board, and had it's own Ethernet port. (As well as serial, for connecting to a modem.) If you disconnect the Ethernet cable from the management board, or remove the management board, you can be pretty sure there's no command-and-control implemented by that route! ;)
Anyway, from what I get from the Bloomberg article, you're looking for a small surface-mount component that looks like a capacitor, choke, filter, resister, transistor. A very small component that looks exactly like all the other very small components littering the circuit board.
I speculate it might be inductively coupled to an I2C bus, etc. through some clever circuit board mis-design.
What do you expect, from an organization started by the inventor of the Maxim Silencer, and whose dad invented the Maxim Machine Gun?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Gotta say, though, "cool do', bro!". Very Tesla-ish!
I "retired" from ham radio many years ago, but got my Novice license in junior high in the late 60's, and then got the General and Advanced while in high school.
As I recall, the ARRL didn't have much of a different reputation back in the 70's. They've always presumed to speak for the majority of American hams, even though the majority of American hams have never been members.
I think the apple does not fall far from the tree.
If you want to tag the location of a post, it uses location data to show a list of nearby locations. It will ask permission the first time you do it.
Now they want to track your location, even when your phone is in your pocket, and not using the app. You will need to give permission to "use location data while not using hte app".
They will give some BS reason why you want that.
There are relevant ads? Haven't seen any relevant ads. Lots of ads, all irrelevant.
They claim, of course, they are trying to make them relevant.
EVERYBODY trying to provide "relevant" ads, please get this: a zillion ads for a one-time purchase I made six months ago, and probably won't make again for several years is not "relevant".
I am tired of ads for large fixed diesel engines.
(And, no, I did not recently buy a large fixed diesel engine. A friend was interested in the possibility of converting one to marine use. Now I am inundated with Caterpillar ads. They gave up on the fixed engines, though, now they are trying to sell me graders. This must be worth even more than mesothelioma.)
I am also tired of *&^%$@! "influencers". I don't give a crap about ANY of that stuff which now is more than posts from my friends.
I do realize that's part of the revenue model. Maybe there isn't a revenue model for the way people actually want to use apps like this.
(Correction for post above, of course I meant "marketing popups", not "marking popups".)
There is nothing in this for users.
The default location sharing (only when the app is open and screen not locked) is fine, and of course can be disabled.It helps tag locations easily.
If you are paranoid, you can always disable location sharing, and still search for locations that you might want to tag.
I didn't sign up for Instagram to be deluged with marking popups. Nor for Facebook to accumulate a database of their user's whereabouts and comings and goings. Nor to create a phantom Facebook profile if I don't have a Facebook account.
You can "explore what's around you" with the current location sharing. If my phone is in my pocket, I don't want/need any "help" "exploring".
I guess this is the beginning of the end of Instagram. It will be absorbed by The Zukerborg.
Why does every farming automation/urban/indoor/shipping container/etc./etc. project grow leafy greens?
Is there really a huge demand or profit in that?
How about:
- orange and purple cauliflower
- asparagus
- berries (out of season)
- morel mushrooms
- dragonfruit
- avocados
In other words, the expensive shit?
Likewise.
(Cue Abbot and Castello...)
Why was this ever on the Play Store in the first place? Why do a small but vocal minority of Android users insist on being able to fsck with their phone's OS, and then complain wah-wah-wah when they are hacked?
- A confused iOS user
Hmmmm... false memories, the Wayback Machine says I'm wrong, and the cam continued to operate through mid-2004 when the domain was sold and then after for I think a couple years.
WTF war did we have around that time? Scheduling that Alzheimer's screening....
Anyway, the camera "went dead" right after we got into some major conflict... The timing was close enough, I just said to myself "maybe not a good idea to give the world a PTZ view of San Diego Bay right now..."
( But, then, I've heard rumors about a Russian spy who lived on Pt. Loma that the sailors would wave to anyway... Probably had something to do with this: https://www.wired.com/2015/07/... )
Wayback only has the static views that were served if you weren't using Netscape browser. :(
>Does Microsoft still let you use your sub-domain?
No, and they never did.
To be clear, I sold the domain to a third party (for $36K, now that I recall, not $28K - I split the $36K 50/50 with my handshake partner), and then a year later they sold it to Microsoft for an undisclosed sum.
I hadn't thought to ask Microsoft to let me continue to use the subdomain! I just went ahead and registered sandiegobaycam.org. Microsoft bought live.net from the party I sold it to, I didn't feel I had any right to it. While the ski sites guy had it, it was a good mutual agreement that helped draw users. The site was rated very highly "above the fold" for "San Diego" for a number of years - typically just below the San Diego Zoo.
Fun fact: the camera "went dead" right after 9/11. I figured it wasn't a good idea at the time to try to revive or replace it. Howard had paid for a nice Panasonic PTZ camera and dome, and viewers could manipulate the camera to look around San Diego Bay, including aircraft carriers, North Island Naval Air Station, Lindbergh Field, etc. etc. I didn't want to buy a new camera, Howard was out of the deal, I just let it ride.
It was fun to have the camera while it lasted. I got "fan mail" from employees at the Naval Oceanic Systems Center, who couldn't see outside from their cubicles. And always appreciation from Navy families who could watch the carriers when they came in and out of the bay.
Subsequently, I've moved, and no longer have that expansive view of San Diego Bay. :(
>$28k is a lot in that case, since no one in the history of the WWW has ever mis-typed '.net' when they meant '.com'. :-)
Actually, I was wrong, it was $36K. I split it 50/50 with Howard, so I got $18K, the 8 stuck in my mind...
Presumably, Microsoft paid more than $36K a year later.
It's certainly POSSIBLE that the buyer knew there were plans in the works. I was and still am baffled why they paid $36K to put ski cams on a domain that doesn't suggest ski cams. ;)
Still, I think fair for all. I can't imagine the buyer made a huge windfall given that it's just a secondary protective domain for Microsoft.
I have some experience with this.
I was the original registrant of live.net. Original registration cost: $0. It was registered by email. (I later had to start paying $35/year to maintain the registration.) Sadly, live.com had been taken a few months prior, but live.net would do, and I wrote a convincing argument for the use of the .net. (At the time, .net domains had to justify some use related to "network infrastructure".)
At the time, I was operating the San Diego Baycam as a hobby. It was hosted at a local ISP gratis and was just using a subdomain of the ISP. It ran on a spare Spark 5 that they had.
At some point, I was contacted by a nice guy named Howard. Howard had backed some early satellite broadcasting venture that didn't make it. Howard had lots of ideas, which tended to be a just bit too early for the times or technology. He now had an idea to create a network of outdoor cams world wide. We talked, we met, we shook hands.
I registered live.net under a gentleman's agreement on behalf of a business to-be-formed with Howard, and moved the Baycam to live.net. The gentleman's agreement was vague. We would do some exploration, and set up a company at some time in the future with some kind of equity split. In the mean time, I would continue to develop the feeder and server software I'd written for the Baycam. (I thought it pretty clever at the time - the server used a circular shared memory buffer, so that multiple viewers were just pulling frames from the buffer. The "video" was motion JPEG using now-obsolete "server push". But no thoughts of how it might scale beyond one server, LOL.)
I registered the domain myself, since the business hadn't been formed. Of course, this is where a LOT of domain registrations go bad! Become a ticking time-bomb, actually. My advice to anyone who needs to register a domain has always been: 1. Don't let anybody register a domain for you - do it yourself. 2. Registrar, DNS, and hosting have to be with separate companies.
The business-to-be never happened. Howard went on to do other things (vegas.com). The Baycam hummed along.
One day, I got an offer out of the blue to buy the domain live.net for $28,000. No idea where they got that figure from - you'd think a buyer would start lower than that... The buyer had a bunch of ski-related travel sites, all registered under disparate domain names. He said he wanted to integrate his ski cams and ski sites under a single domain. It seemed odd to me, because the name live.net had nothing to do with skiing, but whatever....
So, I contacted Howard and asked if he was interested in selling the domain, and splitting the profit. (I'm a nice guy, he's a nice guy...)
We did, escrowing it through escrow.com flawlessly. escrow.com disbursed equal checks to myself and Howard. So, so far, I'm a nice guy, Howard's a nice guy, escrow.com are nice guys.
The buyer put up his ski sites and ski cams, and as part of our agreement, I continued to operate the San Diego Baycam on a subdomain.
Fast forward a year, and I was checking the site. My browser was redirected to Microsoft. I sent off a panicked email to the buyer that his domain had somehow been "hijacked", and the hijacker was forwarding to Microsoft! The domain registration had been changed, and it had private registration.
The buyer emailed me back, no there was no hijacking! He's sold the domain to Microsoft. For how much, I know not.
Shortly thereafter, Microsoft announced their Live rebranding...
Had the buyer known a year in advance of the Live rebranding? I've often wondered. It was a year, and they actually had a network of ski sites and ski cams. It wasn't the best name for a network of ski sites and ski cams. I imagine he did not know. live.com was the primary domain for the rebranding, live.net was presumably "protective" to catch mis-types of TLD. The big question mark has always been the generosity of the unsolicited offer. (This was long enough ago that $28,000 was a lot for
Is the dual camera a huge waste of engineering talent?
Is the OLED display a huge waste of engineering talent?
Is super-retina resolution a huge waste of engineering talent?
Is a 120Hz refresh rate a huge waste of engineering talent?
Is IP68 certification a huge waste of engineering talent?
Is "the most durable glass ever in a smartphone" a huge waste of engineering talent?
All of these are omitted from the iPhone XR, a premium, but cost-reduced model.
Why, SURELY Apple must be planning on dropping all of these features on ALL of their models. Boy, what a waste of engineering talent!
Or, so goes the reasoning of this misguided article.
In the U.S. we have the Americans with Disabilities Act, which I'm sure applies here. Schools have to make reasonable accommodations for disabilities.
A student/parent should be able to ask for a reasonable accommodation if public speaking is likely to trigger some serious negative outcome, legitimately CAN'T reasonably perform the task (e.g. severe speech impediment, etc.) etc.
But this seems to be asking for more. That it makes a student "uncomfortable" doesn't rise to the need for reasonable accommodation.
I wonder how many of these students have no problem at all making YouTube Videos, live-streaming on their favorite social platform, or entertaining their friends in person with their latest misadventures?
Maybe a remedial program to "bridge" these "skills" to the valuable skill of public speaking...
Why do people expect increment phone updates to be "exciting"?
The last "exciting" things in telephony were:
- the smart phone
- the cell phone
- touchtone dialing ("bling" exciting, not "functional" exciting, except it eventually brought us the boring experience of "response trees", which is exciting in it's boringness)
- The trans-Atlantic cable
- Direct-dialed long-distance
- The trans-continental cable
Poor student grades, of course.
Yup! You bet access to high-speed Internet is a problem.
There's a proven correlation between ready high-speed Internet access - particularly through mobile devices - and student grades.