How is satellite not broadband? Is it wider than the 4 kilohertz width of a phone line or 5 kilohertz AM station (aka narrowband)? Yes by a great deal. It is "broader" than the narrowband of a phoneline/AM station. So satellite is broadband. In fact it's at least one order of magnitude broader... sometimes two orders.
As for the original posters comments:
Agree: You can probably choose your local cable company. Some areas even have more than one. Agree: You can probably choose your local phone company. Some areas even have more than one. Disagree: You can likely choose from at least a handful of satelite providers. Disagree: I'm increasingly seeing people using 3G and 4G wireless service as an ISP. Disagree/Non-relevant: You may be able to choose an independent ISP in your area
I disagree with satellite and wireless internet, because they are waaaay too expensive. 5-10 times more than what my DSL line costs, so they are not realistic options (anymore than I could choose to buy a Ferrari instead of a Civic). On the last one: I'm not aware of any independent ISPs. The state government has granted a monopoly to Comcast and Verizon which prevents any other ISP from operating.
You are the typical Libertarian: You have ideals (free market gives the power of Choice to the people) but fail to see when your ideals don't fit into the real world - like the electric, natural gas, and phone monopolies (aka natural monopolies) - and do not adjust your thinking to fit the real world limitations. I've found most libertarians are like that - as if they were horses with blinders, and can only see the narrow path of idealism and don't see real world cases where the ideals break down. .
I thought the US Government's Copyright Office ruled that Apple can no longer stop users from jail-breaking. It is now legal to do so. (Bit surprised it was the US who did it, rather than consumer-friendly EU.)
>>>I did not say they were common carriers, just that they wanted the protections given to common carriers
(1) You've unfairly been marked "troll". The slashdot mod system is seriously broken, because nothing you said or did is trolling/baiting and yet you've had your karma damaged (even though you're innocent). (2) Isn't it amazing how many read your post, and yet did Not read it? You did say "ISP's and Hosting companies" but you've had about 20 people reply, "A hosting company is not an ISP." You never said or implied that it was!
(3) Citation please for your claim?
(4) I'm not aware of any internet-related company that "wants" common carrier protection, because then they would not be able to block bittorrent or Usenet or simple-mail or other protocols they don't like. They'd rather not be considered a CC. (5) Fortunately we have a free market (for hosting companies). This church can just move the website to a different host company that does not censor free speech/press. Also: Can you imagine the uproar if the proposed Mosque located near ground zero suddenly had their website yanked? .
Which companies would be so stupid? Well let's see:
- Comcast - Cox - Cablevision - Time-Warner
In fact in 2009 these companies already met with one another, and agreed to set up a new CATV portal site that would only be accessible to cable customers. You would type in your customer number plus passcode, and gain access to free cable programming. Else you would be blocked. NEXT they laid pressure on Cable Channels by telling them they need to stop providing the programs for free (syfy.com, abcfamily.com, etc), because it was the cable companies that PAID for these programs via subscriber fees. The cable companies claimed their funding of these shows gave them first rights to distribution, and virtually all the channels have agreed.
While we've all been sleeping in front of our TVs, CRTs, or LCDs, the cable companies have quietly signed deals to lock-up these shows behind their own subscriber website. The final nail in the coffin will be enacted in 2011, when the "cable subscribers only" website goes live and the free viewing disappears. So yeah. They have taken up arms against Google, Apple, and the viewers to make sure we cannot see Cable TV online, except via the CATV website. They are powerful and not the least bit intimidated.
And what's worse: Because they are government-created monopolies, there's not a damn thing we can do to stop them. We have as little choice as deciding which electric company or natural gas company we want. The guys in Washington DC may be able to help, but I'm not holding my breath, given their tendency to favor media megacorp protectionism (ACTA, the new Online Copyright Czar, FBI crackdowns on file-sharing, et cetera).
Aside -
I wonder why Microsoft does not try to revive WebTV? I had one of them in the late 90s, and it was crap because lo-definition analog sets made reading the internet difficult (color blur), but now we have high-definition sets that can produce images as clear as a Super VGA monitor. WebTV could succeed this time.
Cooking with Microwaves Re:Cooking for Engineers
on
Cooking For Geeks
·
· Score: 1
That's the corollary for this.
I've often thought someone should write a book with this title, since I almost never use anything but a microwave to make breakfast, lunch, and supper. And yes there is a technique to microwave cooking, so you end up with Food rather than a rubbery (or burnt) hunk of matter,
>>>that's leaving 900 unique characters for results information.
Double that and make it an even 2000 characters/second, because of HTML formatting. A dialup line streams only 5000 characters per second (not including v.92 compression). Can you see now why constant webpage updates would have a negative impact? Oh and you're right the DSL slowdown is not significant but I can still see it.
But access to the web is a right, according to recent papers published by the Democrat leaders in Congress (and echoed by Øbama in his speeches). ----- Okay even I think that was a smart-assed response... but so was the college kid's comments about Pentium 3 and small screens. I'm reflecting back what you're throwing at me. (Like that one scene in Zelda OOT where Link fights the witches with a mirror shield.)
I'm not asking web-developers to stop progress. I'm asking them to stop streaming megabytes of data, when the same job could be done with just a few kilobytes. Like KolibriOS which can run off a single floppy, or Puppy Linux that only needs 32 megabytes of memory. (i.e. Optimize your code, images, etc to use as little internet space as possible.)
>>>Google has locked out thousands of businesses that have never upgraded
Except as others have pointed-out, the employees can disable this feature and make it IE6 compatible. The problem will be for IT Admins to explain how to millions of computer-illiterate office workers. Several manhours will be lost. (shrug)
>>>Second, it automatically shuts off on low bandwidth accounts.
Interesting. It didn't shut off on my DSL - I guess that's not considered low bandwidth? Neither did it shutoff on Dialup, probably because I have web accelerator (compression) turned on, and Netscape ISP's caching appears to be high bandwidth.
Oh and another thing. I've been out of work for almost two years now (minus an all-too-brief 3 month contract as a temp engineer). I think I have a right to be miserable Mr. AC.
The world IS miserable in case you haven't noticed. Like those idiots who are saying, "If the Ground Zero Mosque is built, let's bomb it." I will not silence my opinion about that, or Google, or anything else just because you don't like it. So frak off Anonymous Coward.
If you want to pay to upgrade me to a $50/month connection because webmasters like to stream megabytes of crap, instead of optimizing pages to fit in a few kilobytes... feel free to do so. What's that? You can't afford it? Well guess what. Neither can I.
It is unacceptable for webmasters to design sites that don't work properly on 1 megabit/s or less connections.
>>>Then turn it off in your preferences like they clearly state on their information page or diable javascript for their site. God you're a miserable prick.
Repeat that while logged in, so I can damage your karma the same way you damaged mine. Anonymous Coward. Oh. And there's no way to turn-off the annoying "popup" images that Google now uses during Image searches. It doesn't exist in the preferences.
I also hate their new Image search page which, instead of just displaying image, runs some CPU intensive script that expands/shrinks images as you pass over them. What used to be a fast, pleasant browse is now like walking through molasses. It's so annoying that I'm trying to figure out how to turn if off and go back to the "old" plain images without any kind of Java enhancement.
This "constant updating of results as you type" makes my Hotel dialup connection run even MORE slowly than it did before.
Even on high-speed DSL, it slows things down. Why can't these web developers get into their heads that not everyone has a 1 megabit pipe? (Or if it is available, don't want to spend ~$60/month to get it.) I remember one of the things taught developed in the 90s and early 2000s was to "optimize" their pages to use as few kilobytes as possible - like squeezing GIFs down from 50 to 10KB. Apparently that paradigm got thrown out the window.
>>>In the end, representation generally does happen, in a way - it's just that what individual members of a given society claim they want and value, and what the society actually promotes in the system of governance, are not necessarily the same thing. >>>
Well that does kinda/sorta explain why the Bush Bailout Bill passed in 2008, even though 80% of Americans were against it. It got voted down once, but then passed the second time after the Democrats promised the Republicans (bastards) some special handouts for their home districts. It also kinda/sorta explains why Pelosicare (or whatever you wish to call it) was passed when over 70% of Americans opposed it too.
What point representative democracy if the representatives ignore the clear majority of the people? As for your story, the word you're looking for is "hypocrite". He is corrupt but doesn't see the corruption.
>>>The U.S. seems to have started that way before greed settled in then for reasons I cannot comprehend,
The Northeast (federalists) wanted to protect their growing business interests (mills, fishing) and during the 1790s quickly setup the central bank and other instruments that were unconstitutional, but also not answerable to the people, and held a great deal of power to favor the early corporations.
One could argue the "greed trend" dates as early as the 1780s when the Constitution gave authors and inventors a virtually unlimited monopoly on their creations. That had not existed under the original Confederation. At first that new monopoly was a reasonable 14 year span but now it's over 100 years. Ridiculous.
We are wiser to stick with the precepts of Natural Law, with few excursions. Does nature give to human beings a monopoly over their ideas? No. Therefore neither should humans have a monopoly in Man's Law - let ideas by liberated after a reasonable time (say one decade).
>>>you should be aware that the EU is also very happy to slap European companies with fines when they are found not to play according to the rules.
So too does the US (fined the CD companies and Paypal and Microsoft and.....) but that doesn't disprove the fact the US Congress is a corporate puppet.
Ooops. Sorry. I didn't know Norway was still an independent. Is there a reason why they've chosen to remain outside the Union? (checks wikipedia). I see Norway is part of the European Common Market, so it's still beneficial for the EU to protect Norway economically, albeit not directly through MEP representation. (Kinda similar to how the US protects Puerto Rico businesses, even though they have no voice in the Central Congress.)
BACK TO TOPIC: It seems to me that the European Union voted down ACTA because it's a US protectionist treaty, and does nothing for European television and music corporations, other than limit their future growth. ACTA protects the US Media hegemony.
There were nudie pics and porn passed around in the 80s, but it wasn't "the porn industry" that was behind it. It was individual users sharing with other friends/colleagues.
It was the USERS that made the internet/ online communication popular in the 80s. The porn business deserves zero credit. It's also common to say the porn business made VHS successful and killed Betamax, but that too is a myth.
>>>Interesting If the ac up near the top of the page is correct then you only run windows and your sole reason to post here is to troll. Why bother? you must have more of a life than that >>>
That's one possibility. The other is that the AC is wrong, and I haven't stopped using Linux. You couldn't figure that out yourself?
And how do you fix the position of the close button while just using a mouse? (And not needing to confer with a manual to learn esoteric CLI commands.) .
>>>You have already posted before that you will never try Linux again
That's not true. I just installed Lubuntu 10.04 on my laptop. I'm not anti-linux. I'm just anti-non standard OSes (including Mac) that won't run the things I want to run. Like a friggin' piece of software that will play back videos at double speed, without making everyone sound like chipmunks. I can find that on Windows without hardly trying, but for Linux and Mac OSes it simply doesn't exist.
I'm also anti-user friendly designs and Linux sure as hell qualifies. I can't even get Flash video to run properly on this piece of shit. I keep getting a "lack sufficient permissions to install" even though I am logged in as the Administrator. .
>>>and plan on sticking with Windows...
Well that's true. I also plan to keep using VHS not betamax, Bluray not HDdvd, and NTSC rather than PAL TVs. It is easier to stick with what 90-99% of everybody else is using, rather than buck the trend.
I thought Opera was Europe's #2 web browser? (And the CIS countries #1.) Not as large as the giant the Microsoft but still not small. It's worth the EU's time to protect Opera and other corporations from US megacorps, and ensure Europeans will have jobs, et cetera.
Slashdot Mirror
How is satellite not broadband? Is it wider than the 4 kilohertz width of a phone line or 5 kilohertz AM station (aka narrowband)? Yes by a great deal. It is "broader" than the narrowband of a phoneline/AM station. So satellite is broadband. In fact it's at least one order of magnitude broader... sometimes two orders.
As for the original posters comments:
Agree: You can probably choose your local cable company. Some areas even have more than one.
Agree: You can probably choose your local phone company. Some areas even have more than one.
Disagree: You can likely choose from at least a handful of satelite providers.
Disagree: I'm increasingly seeing people using 3G and 4G wireless service as an ISP.
Disagree/Non-relevant: You may be able to choose an independent ISP in your area
I disagree with satellite and wireless internet, because they are waaaay too expensive. 5-10 times more than what my DSL line costs, so they are not realistic options (anymore than I could choose to buy a Ferrari instead of a Civic). On the last one: I'm not aware of any independent ISPs. The state government has granted a monopoly to Comcast and Verizon which prevents any other ISP from operating.
You are the typical Libertarian: You have ideals (free market gives the power of Choice to the people) but fail to see when your ideals don't fit into the real world - like the electric, natural gas, and phone monopolies (aka natural monopolies) - and do not adjust your thinking to fit the real world limitations. I've found most libertarians are like that - as if they were horses with blinders, and can only see the narrow path of idealism and don't see real world cases where the ideals break down.
.
Question -
I thought the US Government's Copyright Office ruled that Apple can no longer stop users from jail-breaking. It is now legal to do so. (Bit surprised it was the US who did it, rather than consumer-friendly EU.)
>>>I did not say they were common carriers, just that they wanted the protections given to common carriers
(1) You've unfairly been marked "troll". The slashdot mod system is seriously broken, because nothing you said or did is trolling/baiting and yet you've had your karma damaged (even though you're innocent). (2) Isn't it amazing how many read your post, and yet did Not read it? You did say "ISP's and Hosting companies" but you've had about 20 people reply, "A hosting company is not an ISP." You never said or implied that it was!
(3) Citation please for your claim?
(4) I'm not aware of any internet-related company that "wants" common carrier protection, because then they would not be able to block bittorrent or Usenet or simple-mail or other protocols they don't like. They'd rather not be considered a CC. (5) Fortunately we have a free market (for hosting companies). This church can just move the website to a different host company that does not censor free speech/press. Also: Can you imagine the uproar if the proposed Mosque located near ground zero suddenly had their website yanked?
.
Which companies would be so stupid? Well let's see:
- Comcast
- Cox
- Cablevision
- Time-Warner
In fact in 2009 these companies already met with one another, and agreed to set up a new CATV portal site that would only be accessible to cable customers. You would type in your customer number plus passcode, and gain access to free cable programming. Else you would be blocked. NEXT they laid pressure on Cable Channels by telling them they need to stop providing the programs for free (syfy.com, abcfamily.com, etc), because it was the cable companies that PAID for these programs via subscriber fees. The cable companies claimed their funding of these shows gave them first rights to distribution, and virtually all the channels have agreed.
While we've all been sleeping in front of our TVs, CRTs, or LCDs, the cable companies have quietly signed deals to lock-up these shows behind their own subscriber website. The final nail in the coffin will be enacted in 2011, when the "cable subscribers only" website goes live and the free viewing disappears. So yeah. They have taken up arms against Google, Apple, and the viewers to make sure we cannot see Cable TV online, except via the CATV website. They are powerful and not the least bit intimidated.
And what's worse: Because they are government-created monopolies, there's not a damn thing we can do to stop them. We have as little choice as deciding which electric company or natural gas company we want. The guys in Washington DC may be able to help, but I'm not holding my breath, given their tendency to favor media megacorp protectionism (ACTA, the new Online Copyright Czar, FBI crackdowns on file-sharing, et cetera).
Aside -
I wonder why Microsoft does not try to revive WebTV? I had one of them in the late 90s, and it was crap because lo-definition analog sets made reading the internet difficult (color blur), but now we have high-definition sets that can produce images as clear as a Super VGA monitor. WebTV could succeed this time.
That's the corollary for this.
I've often thought someone should write a book with this title, since I almost never use anything but a microwave to make breakfast, lunch, and supper. And yes there is a technique to microwave cooking, so you end up with Food rather than a rubbery (or burnt) hunk of matter,
>>>8 "kilobits" per second
Where did you get that number?
.
>>>that's leaving 900 unique characters for results information.
Double that and make it an even 2000 characters/second, because of HTML formatting. A dialup line streams only 5000 characters per second (not including v.92 compression). Can you see now why constant webpage updates would have a negative impact? Oh and you're right the DSL slowdown is not significant but I can still see it.
But access to the web is a right, according to recent papers published by the Democrat leaders in Congress (and echoed by Øbama in his speeches). ----- Okay even I think that was a smart-assed response... but so was the college kid's comments about Pentium 3 and small screens. I'm reflecting back what you're throwing at me. (Like that one scene in Zelda OOT where Link fights the witches with a mirror shield.)
I'm not asking web-developers to stop progress. I'm asking them to stop streaming megabytes of data, when the same job could be done with just a few kilobytes. Like KolibriOS which can run off a single floppy, or Puppy Linux that only needs 32 megabytes of memory. (i.e. Optimize your code, images, etc to use as little internet space as possible.)
>>>Google has locked out thousands of businesses that have never upgraded
Except as others have pointed-out, the employees can disable this feature and make it IE6 compatible. The problem will be for IT Admins to explain how to millions of computer-illiterate office workers. Several manhours will be lost. (shrug)
>>>Second, it automatically shuts off on low bandwidth accounts.
Interesting. It didn't shut off on my DSL - I guess that's not considered low bandwidth? Neither did it shutoff on Dialup, probably because I have web accelerator (compression) turned on, and Netscape ISP's caching appears to be high bandwidth.
Oh and another thing. I've been out of work for almost two years now (minus an all-too-brief 3 month contract as a temp engineer). I think I have a right to be miserable Mr. AC.
The world IS miserable in case you haven't noticed. Like those idiots who are saying, "If the Ground Zero Mosque is built, let's bomb it." I will not silence my opinion about that, or Google, or anything else just because you don't like it. So frak off Anonymous Coward.
>>>some college kid
If you want to pay to upgrade me to a $50/month connection because webmasters like to stream megabytes of crap, instead of optimizing pages to fit in a few kilobytes... feel free to do so. What's that? You can't afford it? Well guess what. Neither can I.
It is unacceptable for webmasters to design sites that don't work properly on 1 megabit/s or less connections.
>>>Then turn it off in your preferences like they clearly state on their information page or diable javascript for their site. God you're a miserable prick.
Repeat that while logged in, so I can damage your karma the same way you damaged mine. Anonymous Coward. Oh. And there's no way to turn-off the annoying "popup" images that Google now uses during Image searches. It doesn't exist in the preferences.
P.S.
I also hate their new Image search page which, instead of just displaying image, runs some CPU intensive script that expands/shrinks images as you pass over them. What used to be a fast, pleasant browse is now like walking through molasses. It's so annoying that I'm trying to figure out how to turn if off and go back to the "old" plain images without any kind of Java enhancement.
This "constant updating of results as you type" makes my Hotel dialup connection run even MORE slowly than it did before.
Even on high-speed DSL, it slows things down. Why can't these web developers get into their heads that not everyone has a 1 megabit pipe? (Or if it is available, don't want to spend ~$60/month to get it.) I remember one of the things taught developed in the 90s and early 2000s was to "optimize" their pages to use as few kilobytes as possible - like squeezing GIFs down from 50 to 10KB. Apparently that paradigm got thrown out the window.
>>>In the end, representation generally does happen, in a way - it's just that what individual members of a given society claim they want and value, and what the society actually promotes in the system of governance, are not necessarily the same thing.
>>>
Well that does kinda/sorta explain why the Bush Bailout Bill passed in 2008, even though 80% of Americans were against it. It got voted down once, but then passed the second time after the Democrats promised the Republicans (bastards) some special handouts for their home districts. It also kinda/sorta explains why Pelosicare (or whatever you wish to call it) was passed when over 70% of Americans opposed it too.
What point representative democracy if the representatives ignore the clear majority of the people? As for your story, the word you're looking for is "hypocrite". He is corrupt but doesn't see the corruption.
>>>It certainly would be worth the EU's time to protect EU corps from US ones.
Precisely. Or in this case: Vote down a treaty that is a US Protectionist treaty (for the media industry), and doesn't benefit EU corporations at all.
>>>The U.S. seems to have started that way before greed settled in then for reasons I cannot comprehend,
The Northeast (federalists) wanted to protect their growing business interests (mills, fishing) and during the 1790s quickly setup the central bank and other instruments that were unconstitutional, but also not answerable to the people, and held a great deal of power to favor the early corporations.
One could argue the "greed trend" dates as early as the 1780s when the Constitution gave authors and inventors a virtually unlimited monopoly on their creations. That had not existed under the original Confederation. At first that new monopoly was a reasonable 14 year span but now it's over 100 years. Ridiculous.
We are wiser to stick with the precepts of Natural Law, with few excursions. Does nature give to human beings a monopoly over their ideas? No. Therefore neither should humans have a monopoly in Man's Law - let ideas by liberated after a reasonable time (say one decade).
>>>you should be aware that the EU is also very happy to slap European companies with fines when they are found not to play according to the rules.
So too does the US (fined the CD companies and Paypal and Microsoft and.....) but that doesn't disprove the fact the US Congress is a corporate puppet.
Ooops. Sorry. I didn't know Norway was still an independent. Is there a reason why they've chosen to remain outside the Union? (checks wikipedia). I see Norway is part of the European Common Market, so it's still beneficial for the EU to protect Norway economically, albeit not directly through MEP representation. (Kinda similar to how the US protects Puerto Rico businesses, even though they have no voice in the Central Congress.)
BACK TO TOPIC: It seems to me that the European Union voted down ACTA because it's a US protectionist treaty, and does nothing for European television and music corporations, other than limit their future growth. ACTA protects the US Media hegemony.
Really? You felt it necessary to mod me down to "0" simply because I said "EU" instead of Europe???
There were nudie pics and porn passed around in the 80s, but it wasn't "the porn industry" that was behind it. It was individual users sharing with other friends/colleagues.
It was the USERS that made the internet/ online communication popular in the 80s. The porn business deserves zero credit. It's also common to say the porn business made VHS successful and killed Betamax, but that too is a myth.
A troll wrote:
>>>Interesting If the ac up near the top of the page is correct then you only run windows and your sole reason to post here is to troll. Why bother? you must have more of a life than that
>>>
That's one possibility.
The other is that the AC is wrong, and I haven't stopped using Linux.
You couldn't figure that out yourself?
Not demanding anyything different from what Amiga and Mac and Windows OSes provide (the ability to adjust settings using only a mouse).
If Linux wants to be the "desktop OS" than it needs to rise to the same ease-of-use as the big boys.
And how do you fix the position of the close button while just using a mouse? (And not needing to confer with a manual to learn esoteric CLI commands.)
.
>>>You have already posted before that you will never try Linux again
That's not true. I just installed Lubuntu 10.04 on my laptop. I'm not anti-linux. I'm just anti-non standard OSes (including Mac) that won't run the things I want to run. Like a friggin' piece of software that will play back videos at double speed, without making everyone sound like chipmunks. I can find that on Windows without hardly trying, but for Linux and Mac OSes it simply doesn't exist.
I'm also anti-user friendly designs and Linux sure as hell qualifies. I can't even get Flash video to run properly on this piece of shit. I keep getting a "lack sufficient permissions to install" even though I am logged in as the Administrator.
.
>>>and plan on sticking with Windows...
Well that's true. I also plan to keep using VHS not betamax, Bluray not HDdvd, and NTSC rather than PAL TVs. It is easier to stick with what 90-99% of everybody else is using, rather than buck the trend.
I thought Opera was Europe's #2 web browser? (And the CIS countries #1.) Not as large as the giant the Microsoft but still not small. It's worth the EU's time to protect Opera and other corporations from US megacorps, and ensure Europeans will have jobs, et cetera.