The IO processor can be made to do the task much faster than the CPU, because it is not a general-purpose chip. It implements in hardware what the CPU would implement in software. As a result, it costs much less to produce. These are the same considerations that apply to graphics pipelines. It would be grossly economically infeasible to implement the functions of a high-end GPU on the CPU, in part because it's on the wrong end of a bus.
802.1x is an open IEEE standard describing port-based access control for MAC bridges operating in the manner of 802.1D. I'm amazed that anyone would give Benoit enough credibility to parrot his claims since they seem to be utterly incoherent. Is 802.1x a crucial interoperability standard? No. Is its implementation patent-encumbered? No. Is it in any way relevant to or illustrative of his argument (if he had one)? No. Does he have any argument at all? No.
Move along, there's nothing to see here. The clothes have no emperor.
Realistically, there are no standardized protocols for VOIP that work well on the modern NATed IPv4 Internet. IAX2 with the addition of DUNDI, encryption, STUN, and UPNP, could become a de facto standard competitive with Skype, but it doesn't exist today.
It's voice. It goes over IP. Hence, it is VOIP. H.323 is ITU bloat hell. SIP is more reasonably engineered, but doesn't work in the modern, NATed, IPv4 world. Skype works.
Now IAX2, with DUNDI, encryption, STUN, and UPNP support, would be superior to Skype, potentially. But H.323? Don't make me laugh.
Anglo-American cultural influence over the Islamic Middle East has always been shallow because of Anglo-American support for the genocide of the Palestinians. That's the root of the issue here. Without it, the very concept of terrorism as we know it today would never have developed.
I think the support for action against Afghanistan was percieved as self-defense, because the (false) claims of the administration were that Afghanistan was materially supporting the attacks of September 11, 2001. Of course this has since been proven false, and was known to be false within the administration at the time. When the same pattern of deception and slaughter was repeated in Iraq, it became increasingly difficult for intelligent and informed people to deny the painful truth. Ignorant and misinformed (or just plain evil) people blithely continue to follow after the lies, of course.
I'm a bit fuzzy on this "terror" thing. So, killing a few hundred thousand people is not "terrorism", if you plan to occupy their land for a few years before you go home, but killing a few thousand because they are already occupying your land is "terrorism"?
I'm a physicist. I know how easy it would be for a skilled, highly-trained bunch of terrorists to build a bomb from off-the-shelf and natural materials. I don't lose any sleep over this either.
The possibility of purchasing a device is remote and unproven, in comparison to the well-travelled path of developing one.
Slashdot Mirror
> up to 2GB of DDR400 memory and Socket 939 Athlon 64 processors
Wow. Now *that* is a lot of processors.
Your reasoning fails if an ASIC is used for TOE, instead of a general-purpose CPU.
Consider: Why do winmodems suck?
The IO processor can be made to do the task much faster than the CPU, because it is not a general-purpose chip. It implements in hardware what the CPU would implement in software. As a result, it costs much less to produce. These are the same considerations that apply to graphics pipelines. It would be grossly economically infeasible to implement the functions of a high-end GPU on the CPU, in part because it's on the wrong end of a bus.
No, not even in an ideal world, with a 66MHz bus (a practically unachievable 4.2 Gbps).
But PCI-X 266 will handle 10Gbps Ethernet, on a single 64-bit lane.
Ubiquitos con quesa? Ay, caramba!
Run it to your neighbor's house and share it over wifi.
Name one user agent. Just one. Leave alone the issue of interoperability.
802.1x is an open IEEE standard describing port-based access control for MAC bridges operating in the manner of 802.1D. I'm amazed that anyone would give Benoit enough credibility to parrot his claims since they seem to be utterly incoherent. Is 802.1x a crucial interoperability standard? No. Is its implementation patent-encumbered? No. Is it in any way relevant to or illustrative of his argument (if he had one)? No. Does he have any argument at all? No.
Move along, there's nothing to see here. The clothes have no emperor.
Quite probably, it does. Motorola is cranking out Linux-based cellphones in China, and Skype 1.0 runs on Linux.
SIP sucks. H.323 sucks and bites.
Realistically, there are no standardized protocols for VOIP that work well on the modern NATed IPv4 Internet. IAX2 with the addition of DUNDI, encryption,
STUN, and UPNP, could become a de facto standard
competitive with Skype, but it doesn't exist today.
It's voice. It goes over IP. Hence, it is VOIP.
H.323 is ITU bloat hell. SIP is more reasonably
engineered, but doesn't work in the modern, NATed,
IPv4 world. Skype works.
Now IAX2, with DUNDI, encryption, STUN, and UPNP support, would be superior to Skype, potentially. But H.323? Don't make me laugh.
SIP doesn't play well with NAT, and doesn't encrypt.
Skype does both.
What you really want is IAX2 with encryption.
Doesn't exist.
For that you buy a USB phone or a USB-POTS adapter,
such as those found at http://www.pcphoneline.com/skype
Who pays minute charges for cell phones?
VOIP will make money for mobile providers because
users will want their phones networked 24x7, and
pay for the higher service levels.
Skype is all encrypted.
Chechens.
Crack babies? You're kidding, right? What are the chances that crack baby is going to do graduate study at MIT and pay your retirement?
Anglo-American cultural influence over the Islamic
Middle East has always been shallow because of
Anglo-American support for the genocide of the
Palestinians. That's the root of the issue here.
Without it, the very concept of terrorism as we
know it today would never have developed.
I think the support for action against Afghanistan
was percieved as self-defense, because the (false)
claims of the administration were that Afghanistan
was materially supporting the attacks of September
11, 2001. Of course this has since been proven
false, and was known to be false within the administration
at the time. When the same pattern of deception
and slaughter was repeated in Iraq, it became
increasingly difficult for intelligent and informed
people to deny the painful truth. Ignorant and
misinformed (or just plain evil) people blithely
continue to follow after the lies, of course.
Actually, he said that God told him to invade Iraq.
You're going to argue with God? Good luck.
I'm a bit fuzzy on this "terror" thing. So, killing a few hundred thousand people is not "terrorism", if you plan to occupy their land for a few years before you go home, but killing a few thousand because they are already occupying your land is "terrorism"?
As John Kerry said during a stump speech in South Carolina, "...and who among us does not love NASCAR?"
Really. I kid you not.
You definitely should take it up the freight elevator. 50KT at 250 meters would be vastly more impressive than at ground level.
I'm a physicist. I know how easy it would be for a skilled, highly-trained bunch of terrorists to build a bomb from off-the-shelf and natural materials. I don't lose any sleep over this either.
The possibility of purchasing a device is remote and unproven, in comparison to the well-travelled path of developing one.
I think he left off the "unless you live in NYC" part.