"This system was estimated to save $2.8 million per year by reducing the ship's complement by 10%.
In 21 September 1997 while on maneuvers off the coast of Cape Charles, Virginia, a crew member entered a zero into a database field causing a divide by zero error in the ship's Remote Data Base Manager which brought down all the machines on the network, causing the ship's propulsion system to fail.[3]"
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
How about a royalties cap. Copyright lasts 25 years or till royalties reach $x that way you protect the earning power of smaller artists while protecting fair use of consumers.
But this isn't really about poor performers or consumers is it?
I love the idea, and anything that promotes literacy is a winner in my books.
However Project Gutenburg will be where I get my FREE classics.
http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Main_Page
Loaded fine for me. Here is the post.
"Response to phone companies' "Google bandwidth" report
Thursday, December 4, 2008 at 3:28 PM
Posted by Richard Whitt, Washington Telecom and Media Counsel
Earlier this week I thought that the announcement of a broadband access "call to action" was an encouraging sign that the phone and cable carriers could set aside their differences with Internet companies and public interest groups over network neutrality, and focus on solving our nation's broadband challenges. Unfortunately, a report issued today suggests that some carriers would still rather point fingers and keep fighting old battles.
Scott Cleland over at Precursor Blog is, of course, not exactly a neutral analyst. He is paid by the phone and cable companies -- AT&T, Verizon, Time Warner, and others -- to be a full time Google critic. As a result, most people here in Washington take his commentary with a heavy dose of salt.
The report that Mr. Cleland issued today -- alleging that Google is somehow unfairly consuming network bandwidth -- is just the latest in what one blogger called his "payola punditry." Not surprisingly, in his zeal to score points in the net neutrality debate, he made significant methodological and factual errors that undermine his report's conclusions.
First and foremost, there's a huge difference between your own home broadband connection, and the Internet as a whole. It's the consumers voluntarily choosing to use our applications who are actually using their own broadband bandwidth -- not Google. To say that Google somehow "uses" consumers' home broadband connections shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how the Internet actually works.
Second, Google already pays billions of dollars for the bandwidth and server capacity necessary to connect our data centers together, and then to carry traffic from those data centers to the Internet backbone. That is the way the Net has always operated: each side pays for their own connection to the Net.
Third, Mr. Cleland's cost estimates are overblown. For one, his attempt to correlate Google's "market share and traffic" to use of petabytes of bandwidth is misguided. The whole point of a search engine like Google's is to connect a user to some other website as quickly as possible. If Mr. Cleland's definition of "market share" includes all those other sites, and then attributes them to Google's "traffic," that mistake alone would skew the overall numbers by a huge amount.
Mr. Cleland's calculations about YouTube's impact are similarly flawed. Here he confuses "market share" with "traffic share." YouTube's share of video traffic is decidedly smaller than its market share. And typical YouTube traffic takes up far less bandwidth than downloading or streaming a movie.
Finally, the Google search bots that Mr. Cleland claims are driving bandwidth consumption don't even affect consumers' broadband connections at all -- they are searching and indexing only websites.
We don't fault Mr. Cleland for trying to do his job. But it's unfortunate that the phone and cable companies funding his work would rather launch poorly researched broadsides than help solve consumers' problems. "
what's the weight one of these bad boys? plus is coolant non conductive? I should think that the risk of rupture is far higher in a laptop system taking it's hits than a static PC.
I am sure it will be excellent, now if only I could get the SOB loaded. I tried upgrading from 8.04 and screwed my entire system, ho hum.
I still prefer it to vista, at least I am not paying microsoft for the privilege of a broken PC.
Slashdot Mirror
"This system was estimated to save $2.8 million per year by reducing the ship's complement by 10%. In 21 September 1997 while on maneuvers off the coast of Cape Charles, Virginia, a crew member entered a zero into a database field causing a divide by zero error in the ship's Remote Data Base Manager which brought down all the machines on the network, causing the ship's propulsion system to fail.[3]" BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Your submarine has encountered a problem and will now close.
I believe it is called 'the turk' and lifted directly from the terminator series.
Does that mean 97% of Americans have dementia?
How do they intend to nacho-cheese-flavor proof my interface?
They are called bored games for a reason
The biggest inconvenience is having to show up at a dell depot so the can bend you over a desk.
Removing the 'Passive' from passive-aggressive I see
How about a royalties cap. Copyright lasts 25 years or till royalties reach $x that way you protect the earning power of smaller artists while protecting fair use of consumers. But this isn't really about poor performers or consumers is it?
Sorry officer all my USB ports are broken, looks like you will have to do your job.
I love the idea, and anything that promotes literacy is a winner in my books. However Project Gutenburg will be where I get my FREE classics. http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Main_Page
Loaded fine for me. Here is the post. "Response to phone companies' "Google bandwidth" report Thursday, December 4, 2008 at 3:28 PM Posted by Richard Whitt, Washington Telecom and Media Counsel Earlier this week I thought that the announcement of a broadband access "call to action" was an encouraging sign that the phone and cable carriers could set aside their differences with Internet companies and public interest groups over network neutrality, and focus on solving our nation's broadband challenges. Unfortunately, a report issued today suggests that some carriers would still rather point fingers and keep fighting old battles. Scott Cleland over at Precursor Blog is, of course, not exactly a neutral analyst. He is paid by the phone and cable companies -- AT&T, Verizon, Time Warner, and others -- to be a full time Google critic. As a result, most people here in Washington take his commentary with a heavy dose of salt. The report that Mr. Cleland issued today -- alleging that Google is somehow unfairly consuming network bandwidth -- is just the latest in what one blogger called his "payola punditry." Not surprisingly, in his zeal to score points in the net neutrality debate, he made significant methodological and factual errors that undermine his report's conclusions. First and foremost, there's a huge difference between your own home broadband connection, and the Internet as a whole. It's the consumers voluntarily choosing to use our applications who are actually using their own broadband bandwidth -- not Google. To say that Google somehow "uses" consumers' home broadband connections shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how the Internet actually works. Second, Google already pays billions of dollars for the bandwidth and server capacity necessary to connect our data centers together, and then to carry traffic from those data centers to the Internet backbone. That is the way the Net has always operated: each side pays for their own connection to the Net. Third, Mr. Cleland's cost estimates are overblown. For one, his attempt to correlate Google's "market share and traffic" to use of petabytes of bandwidth is misguided. The whole point of a search engine like Google's is to connect a user to some other website as quickly as possible. If Mr. Cleland's definition of "market share" includes all those other sites, and then attributes them to Google's "traffic," that mistake alone would skew the overall numbers by a huge amount. Mr. Cleland's calculations about YouTube's impact are similarly flawed. Here he confuses "market share" with "traffic share." YouTube's share of video traffic is decidedly smaller than its market share. And typical YouTube traffic takes up far less bandwidth than downloading or streaming a movie. Finally, the Google search bots that Mr. Cleland claims are driving bandwidth consumption don't even affect consumers' broadband connections at all -- they are searching and indexing only websites. We don't fault Mr. Cleland for trying to do his job. But it's unfortunate that the phone and cable companies funding his work would rather launch poorly researched broadsides than help solve consumers' problems. "
I am become death destroyer of digital rights.
I am currently a medical student, not a gun runner. The two should not be combined.
what's the weight one of these bad boys? plus is coolant non conductive? I should think that the risk of rupture is far higher in a laptop system taking it's hits than a static PC.
In communist China, Opensource codes you.
In an other shocking study released today, one legged men consistently fared worse than two legged opponents in ass kicking contests.
I believe the film you are looking for is Robot Jox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robot_Jox
TSA considers praying towards mecca 'suspicious behaviour'
Click click click click click...... followed by the sound of uncontrollable weeping.
i meant child pornography, oops
if half the resources were put into combating online identity theft, pornography or malicious hacking, these problems could be stamped out.
I am sure it will be excellent, now if only I could get the SOB loaded. I tried upgrading from 8.04 and screwed my entire system, ho hum. I still prefer it to vista, at least I am not paying microsoft for the privilege of a broken PC.
http://www.channelsurfing.net/ has most sports events streamed live.
http://www.channelsurfing.net/ http://www.chooseandwatch.com/ http://www.channelchooser.com/ http://www.imvite.com/watch-free-live-tv.php http://onlinetv.yamour.com/portal.htm big lists of free streaming channels. some sports some news and discovery channel.