Please take your troll stories out of this respectable web forum. Science does take a considerable amount of faith. Reading about something in a book is not the same as going out and recreating the experiments which lead us to believe the things written in that book to be facts. So, if you are a reader of science, a mere observer if you will, then yes, you must have faith to believe what is said there is true. If you are a researcher, an experimenter, an advancer of science, then faith is required in a different way. The scientist must believe something with insufficient data to prove it to be true, before he can design an experiment and then either prove or disprove his theory. This is called a Hypothesis. Say it with me: Hi-Poh-The-Sis. In this way he must have faith in his own theory before proceeding on a sometimes expensive experiment that takes considerable time. Faith also must be imparted in the case of a researcher seeking funding from those less versed in his subject of study but more heavily laden in wealth. He must sell his idea as ground breaking science, forward moving technology, or society changing paradigms, whatever he must do to get the money to build the machine that will test his hypothesis. That takes strong faith, and for someone to gift that money they must have faith in the scientist not squandering it on trinkets but instead staying in the lab, having no social life, and just running experiments until they complete the research in question. But I think the main difference between science faith and faith faith is, when scientists come across new information that refutes many previously accepted claims which they put their faith into as being true, those scientists hold an open mind, repeat experiments, and if necessary change their view of what is now considered fact. When a religulous persons comes across something that refutes their faith, that person or thing must be possessed by the devil and is subsequently stoned to death or crucified. It even says so in the bible. Some one named Jesus I think. There is no investigation of the new information. There is no learning. The new ideas are heresy and must be stamped out, book burned, and destroyed before they spread to anyone else. Hewn off like cancer. So please don't troll. This firehose is hard enough to keep up with just considering all of the useful information that's posted, let alone the rhetoric and nonsense.
Laws today are merely unenforced loopholes that they can "get you" on if they so choose. We don't need a billion laws and a trillion jursidictions with differing laws. It's simple folks: treat your fellow humans with respect and they will treat you the same. Oh and don't crash into my Bently.
We need to face facts. The state of our society is degrading rapidly. Those who seek to purvey a state of terror across the face of the world respect no boundaries or laws, and I'm certainly not talking about any "ragheads" or "Hajii's" pardon the overabused racist terminology.
The stories and events surrounding this societological paradigm shifting point in history have done very little to point out new ideas or suspicions. These ideas and suspicions have merely bubbled to the surface, gotten out of the basement full of humming computers and empty Doritos bags, and onto the street where more humdrum workaday people can actually see them and think about them.
Well Mister Jones, the corporate office wants us to run this outside web filter to increase productivity.
If the company's primary slogan starts with "Entertainment" and the company's name is "PlayBoy" Why do you want to look at it while you're at Work, Man?
I think the punch of this story is supposed to be related an apparent fact that the makers of these expensive devices that do only one thing have had their hands in the cookie jar for so long and are now exerting their vast influence to decide the outcome over whether insurance will be allowed to pay for their superior competitor at 5-10% the price instead.
All of the other points I've read by comment posters so far seem to be pale in comparison.
Whatever the argument about whether this is a security fix or not results in, you will find it interesting to note the following:
Non-security hotfix support
X
Requires extended hotfix agreement, purchased within 90 days of mainstream support ending.
It is now more than 90 days after the mainstream support is scheduled to end, and thus purchasing this so-called hotfix agreement is not possible.
Interesting timing
Fox News? What's the matter? Haven't you heard of CNN? That network uses even their car commercials to pound the point home.
I believe that television is an inherently terrible place to get news from.
Yes it is truly terrible to trust the television because it is completely under the control of a government agency which does not have to abide by the constitution. And here in Canada it's a little worse, but less abused.
From the page linked in previous post:
You said that it was critical for people to "vet information⦠because there is so much disinformation out there that it's frightening, frankly, in a free society that depends on information to make informed decisions." Mr. Friedman then chimed in that the Internet is "an open sewer of untreated, unfiltered information."
And soon the internet too will be brought under the umbrella of censorship, and then we'll be back to the dim ages.
I'm waiting for companies to drop Microsoft Operating Systems solely on the basis that they will be able to finally fire the IT guy on their staff whose sole job is to keep track of all the different versions of "windows", and which of their computers are running them and why.
Nuclear Silos!
I really hope not.
But this so called cyberwarfare that previous posters are talking about that requires outlandish budgets because it's supposedly more dangerous than real warfare is only dangerous when you link weapons to computers. And here we are sitting on top of tens of thousands of nuclear bombs controlled by computers, and building airplanes and tanks and robots with guns. It doesn't matter if they're linked to the internet or not. The fact remains they have radio receivers that can give commands to shoot and kill people.
Please stop listing cyber-graffiti and start talking about the serious problems.
Or this could be a simple technique by the information security agents to create a sort of "honeypot" for hackers to target so they can keep the serious information out of the crosshairs. Such as the F-35
The concept of bricking out components in such a way that they may be assembled like Legoâ Brand building blocks (or whatever the 50 people who think it's important seem to think it should be called) can be ported to the concept of software design, as it already has in some regards. It's called Encapsulation. It's in very good practice when you're not the only one hacking at the code.
Why can't conventional buildings use this concept? Granted you wouldn't do it on a single family house, but when you start to build the bigger buildings once you have the structural integrity built, would it be worthwhile to slide in a building block that makes up a condo or a room or an office space?
It would make firewalls easier, and if the new "room block" had standardized connections for water, sewer, central air, electricity, and telecommunications, such connections could be made nearly instantly, and they could be metered. This would effectively lower the rent for all tenants, save the building owner on hefty utility bills, and pass along such costs to the tenant. Bearing the burden of utility bills has a marvelous effect on conservation.
Imagine what this could do for the new "green" building craze that's started up recently. Some "room blocks" could involve green technologies. Solar Panels on the exterior walls, or heat absorbent walls to allow the heating of water or whatever else a tenant might custom build into their "room-block" before ordering it from the room-block factory.
I think a lot would have to happen before economies of scale made this even remotely viable. A city would have to have dozens of very large buildings compatible with this system before anyone will be much interested in building a new building that is compatible with the system or develop a factory to manufacture them, or a transportation system that will swap them in and out on-demand and bring them to the warehouse to be refit.
Not to mention the fact that there is now a hundred posts entirely off topic. If you guys have that much time laying around you need to get in touch with me and/or find something useful to do.
There are many in the world (He who invented Lawyers comes to mind) who would argue that as long as it causes people to be able to feed their families and buy cars so that the car makers can feed theirs and so on.
Just look at the recycling business for example. The government spends a lot of money subsidizing this industry and yet it costs more to recycle than it does to landfill the waste and dig up and process new shit. It causes more pollution to sort and recycle old shit than it does to harvest and process fresh. Except aluminum. Processing bauxite is fucking brutal on this planet. In fact in Canada we've been known to locate aluminum smelters in close proximity to hydroelectric dams. Imagine damming a river and flooding a whole valley so that you can make shit out of aluminum-bearing rocks.
Anyway, examine the global economy as a whole. It is filled with useless products that actually fuel the economy in such a way that it is temporarily self sustaining. Or... was.
You're right. As the article implies it's now known as thermodynamics. It can also be called Newtonian physics. Our moms tell us we have two ears and one mouth therefore we should listen twice as much as we speak. Unfortunately for this site and its linked articles we have ten fingers and only two eyes.
The whole point of the beautiful minds studying this nanotube filament is to observe something that truly does require the calculations from both old physics and new physics (call them whatever you want, but know what the difference is) in order to model and predict the behavior of.
First Let me just say that all microsoft had to do to provide the airforce with a secure version of XP was to remove all of their built in backdoors and security holes introduced in order to fuel the security industry. Thanks for making millions of jobs for america and making computer users foot the bill!
Second, obviously they can never release this Secure Microsoft program to the public. (That's such an oxymoron I had to type it slowly) Every major public release of every operating system humanity has ever come up with has been hacked, rooted, and otherwise had its security demolished.
Releasing this system to the public will merely create a group of people bent on cracking it and then the air force won't have a secure version anymore. Pardon me for saying it, but I personally wouldn't want the air force telling me I owe them money. Brass knuckles or a baseball bat are bad enough.
Okay here's the plan. Wait until the economy is in a downturn that some call a recession and some call depression, then slap some companies who indirectly are responsible for the newest industry with millions of jobs but is based in another country with a ten figure fine. So we can see the sticky liquid which has trapped all the ants. Who has a magnifying glass?
I have seen several projects operate in similar situations using wireless technology in rural environments. I have no idea what spectrum the wirless operated on, however it need not matter. I don't expect this information to be of too much help, but here it is.
First, I must emphasize the point made by many previous posters that you need to do your homework. Examine the costs involved in starting such a company. Examine the competition closely, and compare it to your potential to make profits and essentially steal their customers. How will you do this? Will you offer superior service? Lower prices? Will your customer support be more personal? Will your uptime be better? The list is endless
There are two aspects of being a consumer level ISP, aside from the other aspects of any business such as management and customer service. First, you must bring service from a higher tier ISP into your place of business.
Sometimes there is also a network exchange which ties into other local networks in order to prevent data from leaving the municipality only to return on a different link, but that's really for urban environments.
It doesn't matter to most customers where you get this service, as long as it's reliable, fast enough to serve all your customers, and gives reasonable ping times to the rest of the internet.
There are many ways of doing this which are not outlined in above posts. The two methods I read by other posters were the same method really. Own your own fibre link or lease space off another's. This will be suicide for your business model I think. The former is prohibitively expensive, and the latter is to put your business and your customers at the mercy of the very companies you wish to compete against. They may subject you to traffic-shaping, false unreliability (they switch you off and call it equipment problems), or the ever fearsome CENSORSHIP.
An alternative would be satellite link up. I can't recommend this but do your research. I understand it's ridiculously expensive and is normally sold to end users rather than ISPs. I also hear that it's slow, gives retarded ping times, and is very unreliable.
When I was growing up and the days of dialup were upon us, the ISP of the town had a microwave link. The equivalent of a T1 was sold to them over microwave relays atop the mountains. It ran from Seattle WA to Mackenzie BC, some 800 miles or so. The ping was great, and the link speed was 1.5Mbps bidirectional.
The second aspect of running an ISP is to get your service from your place of business to your customers. In the example I wrote about above the ISP in my hometown began offering a wireless service which was rather expensive but became the town's only broadband service at the time. The primary customer to this was the schools in town. Of course being a student at said school I quickly saturated this pipe with hotline downloads and got in plenty of trouble, but that's another story. This link up was point-to-point and went throughout all the schools in town. A reasonably hilly town, this was likely aided with the original microwave tower on the nearby mountain, but I'm not sure. The ping was LAN quality and it seemed to have speeds of 1.4Mbps (I'm unsure of whether it was bidirectional or not).
The OP is discussing the reality of making this happen with the newly allowed whitespace between TV channels. The question is does hardware exist to do this yet? Well, if it doesn't it is not particularly hard to design your own using existing hardware and modifying the spectrum it operates on. I have met a gentleman who was hired to do a similar linkup in his own town, very hilly, to the schools in that place. He spoke to me of modifying the radios he had. I cannot remember the spectrum they operated on, or if he even told me, but he was able to tighten the band for less interference given and received. He also needed to seek inspection of these devices by a regulator. Keep in mind this is in Canada so the rules may be different. In th
Hair Cut Corporations! It will be the new corn farm for ethanol craze! Worlds biggest supplier of food growth fertilizer is DairyLand farms but Chatters salon!
Whoever sells more haircuts will have more supply to sell to the farmers. This will lead to swift corporate takeovers and mergers. Watch out!
Lots of math regarding the impulse required to slow said spacecraft to a speed worthy of using retros to attain a near stationary speed and land slowly with all cosmonauts alive and... well just alive.
Let's consider one more thing that simply may not add up: the speed of the capsule when its rockets are fired. How fast is a vehicle under re-entry speeds moving when it reaches the altitude of 800-600 meters? If the margin of error is in fact 200 meters like the difference between 800 and 600 suggests, will this not leave only seconds between knowing there is an emergency situation and calling for the recovery crew to get out their egg flippers to pick up what's left of the cosmonauts?
Slashdot Mirror
Please take your troll stories out of this respectable web forum. Science does take a considerable amount of faith. Reading about something in a book is not the same as going out and recreating the experiments which lead us to believe the things written in that book to be facts. So, if you are a reader of science, a mere observer if you will, then yes, you must have faith to believe what is said there is true.
If you are a researcher, an experimenter, an advancer of science, then faith is required in a different way. The scientist must believe something with insufficient data to prove it to be true, before he can design an experiment and then either prove or disprove his theory. This is called a Hypothesis. Say it with me: Hi-Poh-The-Sis. In this way he must have faith in his own theory before proceeding on a sometimes expensive experiment that takes considerable time.
Faith also must be imparted in the case of a researcher seeking funding from those less versed in his subject of study but more heavily laden in wealth. He must sell his idea as ground breaking science, forward moving technology, or society changing paradigms, whatever he must do to get the money to build the machine that will test his hypothesis. That takes strong faith, and for someone to gift that money they must have faith in the scientist not squandering it on trinkets but instead staying in the lab, having no social life, and just running experiments until they complete the research in question.
But I think the main difference between science faith and faith faith is, when scientists come across new information that refutes many previously accepted claims which they put their faith into as being true, those scientists hold an open mind, repeat experiments, and if necessary change their view of what is now considered fact. When a religulous persons comes across something that refutes their faith, that person or thing must be possessed by the devil and is subsequently stoned to death or crucified. It even says so in the bible. Some one named Jesus I think. There is no investigation of the new information. There is no learning. The new ideas are heresy and must be stamped out, book burned, and destroyed before they spread to anyone else. Hewn off like cancer.
So please don't troll. This firehose is hard enough to keep up with just considering all of the useful information that's posted, let alone the rhetoric and nonsense.
Laws today are merely unenforced loopholes that they can "get you" on if they so choose. We don't need a billion laws and a trillion jursidictions with differing laws. It's simple folks: treat your fellow humans with respect and they will treat you the same. Oh and don't crash into my Bently.
We need to face facts. The state of our society is degrading rapidly. Those who seek to purvey a state of terror across the face of the world respect no boundaries or laws, and I'm certainly not talking about any "ragheads" or "Hajii's" pardon the overabused racist terminology. The stories and events surrounding this societological paradigm shifting point in history have done very little to point out new ideas or suspicions. These ideas and suspicions have merely bubbled to the surface, gotten out of the basement full of humming computers and empty Doritos bags, and onto the street where more humdrum workaday people can actually see them and think about them.
Wonder no more. Find out what the something else is. The government uses great public spectacles as media distractions every single day.
Well Mister Jones, the corporate office wants us to run this outside web filter to increase productivity. If the company's primary slogan starts with "Entertainment" and the company's name is "PlayBoy" Why do you want to look at it while you're at Work, Man?
This sounds like a dangerous experiment that could result in zombies roaming about and killing or infecting us all.
I think the punch of this story is supposed to be related an apparent fact that the makers of these expensive devices that do only one thing have had their hands in the cookie jar for so long and are now exerting their vast influence to decide the outcome over whether insurance will be allowed to pay for their superior competitor at 5-10% the price instead. All of the other points I've read by comment posters so far seem to be pale in comparison.
Non-security hotfix support X Requires extended hotfix agreement, purchased within 90 days of mainstream support ending.
It is now more than 90 days after the mainstream support is scheduled to end, and thus purchasing this so-called hotfix agreement is not possible. Interesting timing
I believe that television is an inherently terrible place to get news from.
Yes it is truly terrible to trust the television because it is completely under the control of a government agency which does not have to abide by the constitution. And here in Canada it's a little worse, but less abused. From the page linked in previous post:
You said that it was critical for people to "vet information⦠because there is so much disinformation out there that it's frightening, frankly, in a free society that depends on information to make informed decisions." Mr. Friedman then chimed in that the Internet is "an open sewer of untreated, unfiltered information."
And soon the internet too will be brought under the umbrella of censorship, and then we'll be back to the dim ages.
I'm waiting for companies to drop Microsoft Operating Systems solely on the basis that they will be able to finally fire the IT guy on their staff whose sole job is to keep track of all the different versions of "windows", and which of their computers are running them and why.
As opposed to the... decremental? style of windows releases? Spotty? Roller coaster? Wait. Isn't "upgrade" a synonym to increment? Oh.
We're talking about code that is 12 to 15 years old in its origin
Maybe you shouldn't have admitted that. And why praytell, is the code this old?
Nuclear Silos! I really hope not. But this so called cyberwarfare that previous posters are talking about that requires outlandish budgets because it's supposedly more dangerous than real warfare is only dangerous when you link weapons to computers. And here we are sitting on top of tens of thousands of nuclear bombs controlled by computers, and building airplanes and tanks and robots with guns. It doesn't matter if they're linked to the internet or not. The fact remains they have radio receivers that can give commands to shoot and kill people. Please stop listing cyber-graffiti and start talking about the serious problems.
Or this could be a simple technique by the information security agents to create a sort of "honeypot" for hackers to target so they can keep the serious information out of the crosshairs. Such as the F-35
The concept of bricking out components in such a way that they may be assembled like Legoâ Brand building blocks (or whatever the 50 people who think it's important seem to think it should be called) can be ported to the concept of software design, as it already has in some regards. It's called Encapsulation. It's in very good practice when you're not the only one hacking at the code.
Why can't conventional buildings use this concept? Granted you wouldn't do it on a single family house, but when you start to build the bigger buildings once you have the structural integrity built, would it be worthwhile to slide in a building block that makes up a condo or a room or an office space?
It would make firewalls easier, and if the new "room block" had standardized connections for water, sewer, central air, electricity, and telecommunications, such connections could be made nearly instantly, and they could be metered. This would effectively lower the rent for all tenants, save the building owner on hefty utility bills, and pass along such costs to the tenant. Bearing the burden of utility bills has a marvelous effect on conservation.
Imagine what this could do for the new "green" building craze that's started up recently. Some "room blocks" could involve green technologies. Solar Panels on the exterior walls, or heat absorbent walls to allow the heating of water or whatever else a tenant might custom build into their "room-block" before ordering it from the room-block factory.
I think a lot would have to happen before economies of scale made this even remotely viable. A city would have to have dozens of very large buildings compatible with this system before anyone will be much interested in building a new building that is compatible with the system or develop a factory to manufacture them, or a transportation system that will swap them in and out on-demand and bring them to the warehouse to be refit.
Will someone please delete the offtopic posts in this thread?
Not to mention the fact that there is now a hundred posts entirely off topic. If you guys have that much time laying around you need to get in touch with me and/or find something useful to do.
Let's invade them! They're pirating software!
...
What's that? Everyone thinks that's good??
Let's invade them! They're censoring the internet!
There are many in the world (He who invented Lawyers comes to mind) who would argue that as long as it causes people to be able to feed their families and buy cars so that the car makers can feed theirs and so on.
Just look at the recycling business for example. The government spends a lot of money subsidizing this industry and yet it costs more to recycle than it does to landfill the waste and dig up and process new shit. It causes more pollution to sort and recycle old shit than it does to harvest and process fresh. Except aluminum. Processing bauxite is fucking brutal on this planet. In fact in Canada we've been known to locate aluminum smelters in close proximity to hydroelectric dams. Imagine damming a river and flooding a whole valley so that you can make shit out of aluminum-bearing rocks.
Anyway, examine the global economy as a whole. It is filled with useless products that actually fuel the economy in such a way that it is temporarily self sustaining. Or... was.
You're right. As the article implies it's now known as thermodynamics. It can also be called Newtonian physics. Our moms tell us we have two ears and one mouth therefore we should listen twice as much as we speak. Unfortunately for this site and its linked articles we have ten fingers and only two eyes.
The whole point of the beautiful minds studying this nanotube filament is to observe something that truly does require the calculations from both old physics and new physics (call them whatever you want, but know what the difference is) in order to model and predict the behavior of.
First Let me just say that all microsoft had to do to provide the airforce with a secure version of XP was to remove all of their built in backdoors and security holes introduced in order to fuel the security industry. Thanks for making millions of jobs for america and making computer users foot the bill!
Second, obviously they can never release this Secure Microsoft program to the public. (That's such an oxymoron I had to type it slowly) Every major public release of every operating system humanity has ever come up with has been hacked, rooted, and otherwise had its security demolished.
Releasing this system to the public will merely create a group of people bent on cracking it and then the air force won't have a secure version anymore. Pardon me for saying it, but I personally wouldn't want the air force telling me I owe them money. Brass knuckles or a baseball bat are bad enough.
Okay here's the plan. Wait until the economy is in a downturn that some call a recession and some call depression, then slap some companies who indirectly are responsible for the newest industry with millions of jobs but is based in another country with a ten figure fine. So we can see the sticky liquid which has trapped all the ants. Who has a magnifying glass?
I have seen several projects operate in similar situations using wireless technology in rural environments. I have no idea what spectrum the wirless operated on, however it need not matter. I don't expect this information to be of too much help, but here it is.
First, I must emphasize the point made by many previous posters that you need to do your homework. Examine the costs involved in starting such a company. Examine the competition closely, and compare it to your potential to make profits and essentially steal their customers. How will you do this? Will you offer superior service? Lower prices? Will your customer support be more personal? Will your uptime be better? The list is endless
There are two aspects of being a consumer level ISP, aside from the other aspects of any business such as management and customer service. First, you must bring service from a higher tier ISP into your place of business.
Sometimes there is also a network exchange which ties into other local networks in order to prevent data from leaving the municipality only to return on a different link, but that's really for urban environments.
It doesn't matter to most customers where you get this service, as long as it's reliable, fast enough to serve all your customers, and gives reasonable ping times to the rest of the internet.
There are many ways of doing this which are not outlined in above posts. The two methods I read by other posters were the same method really. Own your own fibre link or lease space off another's. This will be suicide for your business model I think. The former is prohibitively expensive, and the latter is to put your business and your customers at the mercy of the very companies you wish to compete against. They may subject you to traffic-shaping, false unreliability (they switch you off and call it equipment problems), or the ever fearsome CENSORSHIP.
An alternative would be satellite link up. I can't recommend this but do your research. I understand it's ridiculously expensive and is normally sold to end users rather than ISPs. I also hear that it's slow, gives retarded ping times, and is very unreliable.
When I was growing up and the days of dialup were upon us, the ISP of the town had a microwave link. The equivalent of a T1 was sold to them over microwave relays atop the mountains. It ran from Seattle WA to Mackenzie BC, some 800 miles or so. The ping was great, and the link speed was 1.5Mbps bidirectional.
The second aspect of running an ISP is to get your service from your place of business to your customers. In the example I wrote about above the ISP in my hometown began offering a wireless service which was rather expensive but became the town's only broadband service at the time. The primary customer to this was the schools in town. Of course being a student at said school I quickly saturated this pipe with hotline downloads and got in plenty of trouble, but that's another story. This link up was point-to-point and went throughout all the schools in town. A reasonably hilly town, this was likely aided with the original microwave tower on the nearby mountain, but I'm not sure. The ping was LAN quality and it seemed to have speeds of 1.4Mbps (I'm unsure of whether it was bidirectional or not).
The OP is discussing the reality of making this happen with the newly allowed whitespace between TV channels. The question is does hardware exist to do this yet? Well, if it doesn't it is not particularly hard to design your own using existing hardware and modifying the spectrum it operates on. I have met a gentleman who was hired to do a similar linkup in his own town, very hilly, to the schools in that place. He spoke to me of modifying the radios he had. I cannot remember the spectrum they operated on, or if he even told me, but he was able to tighten the band for less interference given and received. He also needed to seek inspection of these devices by a regulator. Keep in mind this is in Canada so the rules may be different. In th
Hair Cut Corporations! It will be the new corn farm for ethanol craze! Worlds biggest supplier of food growth fertilizer is DairyLand farms but Chatters salon!
Whoever sells more haircuts will have more supply to sell to the farmers. This will lead to swift corporate takeovers and mergers. Watch out!
Lots of math regarding the impulse required to slow said spacecraft to a speed worthy of using retros to attain a near stationary speed and land slowly with all cosmonauts alive and... well just alive.
Let's consider one more thing that simply may not add up: the speed of the capsule when its rockets are fired. How fast is a vehicle under re-entry speeds moving when it reaches the altitude of 800-600 meters? If the margin of error is in fact 200 meters like the difference between 800 and 600 suggests, will this not leave only seconds between knowing there is an emergency situation and calling for the recovery crew to get out their egg flippers to pick up what's left of the cosmonauts?