>>>Since when did the European Union become it's own country?
Where did I say it was? Congrats on making a Strawman argument. The word I used was "federation" which is what the EU is. A federal union of 25 member states, just as the US is a federal union of 50 member states, or Canada is federal union of 15(?) member provinces.
Oh and yes "state" to describe Sweden is appropriate. It's exactly the same word used on the EU website. Check it out.
>>>Not sure where you'd have to live in Washington to get 11 megabits -
It's an AVERAGE people. I know you understand what that word means. Some people get less while others (like Redmond Washington residents) get more. It averages out to 11 Mbit/s overall.
>>>11 megabits
That's approximately how large Final Fantasy 4 was when released for the Super Nintendo/Famicom. The FF6 cartridge was 64 megabits.
>>>768k up. That makes my local FTP server a little sluggish
Bah. When I ran my own BBS the upload speed was only 9 kbit/s (premium subscription; non-subscribers only got the standard 2k speed). I would have thought I had died and angels were sucking my ____ if I had a 768k uploading capability for my bulletin board
That's just the proposed legal minimum. If you bothered to read my *whole* post, you'd see I talked about Rural people who had been upgraded to 1500 and 3000, which are the usual standards. That's a huge jump (100 times) compared to the Dialup speeds they used to have.
Oh and just for full disclosure: I have 700k. By choice. I could go higher, but don't think I need anything faster. Just like I don't think I need "a shiny red car. Shaped like a penis." (quoting Spike the vampire)
>>>we should be leading in broadband speeds, not following.
We're not leading but we're not exactly falling behind either, when compared to other continent-spanning federations. #2 isn't a bad place to be:
Russian Federation 8.3 Mbit/s U.S. 7.0 E.U. 6.6 Canada 5.7 Australia 5.1 China 3.0 Brazil 2.1 Mexico 1.1 Mbit/s
And if you prefer to look on a state-by-state basis of the EU, US, and Canada then you get: 1 Sweden 13 Mbit/s 2 Delaware, Romania,Netherlands,Bulgaria 12 3 Washington,Rhode Island 11 4 Massachusetts 10 5 New Jersey,Virginia,New Hampshire,New York 9 6 British Columbia,Colorado,Connecticut,Arizona, Slovakia 8 Mbit/s
1000 kbit/s is 40 times faster than what some rural residents currently have (28k or 33k analog). And it would be extremely easy to implement - just use the already-existing phone lines that lead in 99.9% of homes. All that's needed is to install the DSLAM and it's done. The entire US could be finished by 1/1/2012.
I've spoken to two people, who formerly had 26k and 33k respectively, and they love the new DSL. They jumped from those slow speed to 1500 and 3000 kbit/s respectively.
I don't understand people when they complain about companies making profit. If they weren't making a profit, then there'd be no planes for you to fly, because the companies would be bankrupt. BTW have you ever thought about driving? Back when I traveled a lot from Oklahoma City to Minneapolis, I used to drive. My coworkers flew. They usually arrived at 5 o'clock while I arrived at 6 or 6:30. Not a significant difference but my drive was a lot more relaxing (and cheaper).
>>>Dinged $25 on the way to Vegas. Then dinged another $52 in resort fees. Sure its *ONLY* $77. But fraud is fraud.
Exaggerate much? I'm sure there's some way you could have avoided those fees, like not carrying luggage or using a different hotel or complaining to your credit card about an unauthorized charge.
In most cases people only get "frauded" if they let themselves. For example I recently was charged $35 late fee for a credit bill I never got. The phone operator refused to do anything, so I got ahold of the supervisor and told him point blank, "Remove the fee or close the card. Your choice." He decided he's rather not lose my ~15,000 a year business and refunded the money.
In another case I was denied a mail-in rebate on a DVD player because I missed the filing deadline - 15 days. I called - they refused to help. I complained to the FTC and they said it was a violation of law - it must be at least 30 days. I called the rebate company again, told them I had talked to the US Government and I'm prepared to file charges if that's what it takes. The supervisor caved and sent me a $25 check.
Point:
Nobody defrauded you. You defrauded yourself. You let them charge that resort fee and you did nothing to fight back. You just rolled-over like a jellyfish. ---- It also sounds like you didn't read the fine print. Like those who claimed they ordered "unlimited" service ven though the contract states otherwise. It's hard to blame others when it's right there in black-and-white: "You will be charged X dollars for extra food," or whatever.
Yes but some people still think politicians/government are completely honest so they need a reminder from time to time that they aren't. Likewise some people think Windows is safe. Just this morning a Slashdotter posted that Windows is no more insecure than Linux. This story proves them wrong. (If this was Linux it would be fixed within a week, but some resourceful OSS programmer.)
>>>The whole point of turning off analogue signals is to free up space in the broadcast spectrum
I see you didn't read my post (below), so I'll repeat the relevant bits: Channels 21-30 and 41-62 will still be occupied by DTV, and not freed up. The 31-40 band has an uncertain future but most of the leaders want to reserve it, for future DTV growth. So nothing will be sold off.
>>>I'm curious about what you're doing that makes 8Mb/s slow
The grandparent poster has Spoiled brat syndrome. No matter how much you give 'em, they still are not satisfied. My link's only 0.7 Mbit/s and I think it works just fine even when watching hulu.com or syfy.com. And for bittorrent it downloads faster than I can watch the videos.
Yeah I was right. Channels 21-30 and 41-62 will still be occupied by DTV. Only channels 31-40 will be freed-up, andno plan is set on what to do with them. Some have proposed keeping that space for another DTV multiplex
Your link says nothing about Selling-off channels. My understanding is that the UK DTV will occupy the same space analog TV occupied. (In the same way channels 2 to 51 remained the same in the US.)
>>>My phone bill would pay that off in 1 year to 18 months
That's assuming you buy the Broadband service. If you choose not to, then the fiber just laws idle and the BT company will have lost a huge chunk of cash. ----- Also what kind of frakked-up phone service do you have? Mine is only $15/month and would take over five years time to cover that ~$1000 installation cost. You must be getting ripped-off.
>>>Obviously, all the satellite options suffer from the upstream latency issue for VOIP
(1) How about just using an old-fashioned phone?
(2) You don't have to move there. You made that choice yourself. You lose fast internet, but in return gain the beauty of a rural home. These are the tradeoffs we all choose as a natural part of life - lose some and gain some. If you think internet is more important than just move back to the city or suburb.
I would consider that a misappropriation of funds. Like taxing car drivers to provide free rides to train people. The TV owners shouldn't have to fund other persons' free internet.
Well if you don't believe them, maybe ask Ars Technica. They say the per home of installation of broadband (via fiber) is between 850 and 1300 Euros. Not exactly cheap. IMHO this broadband plan would make more sense:
- Take a page out of the FDR years which mandated telephone companies must wire all homes with telephone lines - Update the law so it says telephone companies must provide DSL (or FiOS or equivalent service) to all homes by 1/1/2012 - Use the already-existing Universal Service Fund (USF) to cover the costs
Done. Since 99.9% of homes have telephone wires running into them, there's no digging required. No manual labor. No disruption. Simply install a ~$100 DSLAM in each neighborhood. Within a year's time, virtually everyone would have access to 1000 kbit/s or more service. That's 20+ times faster than what they had before (28k or 56k).
When Linux develops a hole, it can be immediately plugged by updating the source code. In contrast with Windows you have to sit-and-pray that Microsoft will do something. In most cases they don't - they like to drag their feet. QED linux is more secure.
Slashdot Mirror
>>>use the already-existing phone lines
P.S. And wouldn't have to decapitate Free TV or Free Tadio to do it, as the current FCC plan would do.
>>>Since when did the European Union become it's own country?
Where did I say it was? Congrats on making a Strawman argument. The word I used was "federation" which is what the EU is. A federal union of 25 member states, just as the US is a federal union of 50 member states, or Canada is federal union of 15(?) member provinces.
Oh and yes "state" to describe Sweden is appropriate.
It's exactly the same word used on the EU website.
Check it out.
>>>Not sure where you'd have to live in Washington to get 11 megabits -
It's an AVERAGE people. I know you understand what that word means. Some people get less while others (like Redmond Washington residents) get more. It averages out to 11 Mbit/s overall.
>>>11 megabits
That's approximately how large Final Fantasy 4 was when released for the Super Nintendo/Famicom. The FF6 cartridge was 64 megabits.
>>>768k up. That makes my local FTP server a little sluggish
Bah. When I ran my own BBS the upload speed was only 9 kbit/s (premium subscription; non-subscribers only got the standard 2k speed). I would have thought I had died and angels were sucking my ____ if I had a 768k uploading capability for my bulletin board
>>>1000kbits is crap.
That's just the proposed legal minimum. If you bothered to read my *whole* post, you'd see I talked about Rural people who had been upgraded to 1500 and 3000, which are the usual standards. That's a huge jump (100 times) compared to the Dialup speeds they used to have.
Oh and just for full disclosure: I have 700k. By choice. I could go higher, but don't think I need anything faster. Just like I don't think I need "a shiny red car. Shaped like a penis." (quoting Spike the vampire)
>>>we should be leading in broadband speeds, not following.
We're not leading but we're not exactly falling behind either, when compared to other continent-spanning federations. #2 isn't a bad place to be:
Russian Federation 8.3 Mbit/s
U.S. 7.0
E.U. 6.6
Canada 5.7
Australia 5.1
China 3.0
Brazil 2.1
Mexico 1.1 Mbit/s
And if you prefer to look on a state-by-state basis of the EU, US, and Canada then you get:
1 Sweden 13 Mbit/s
2 Delaware, Romania,Netherlands,Bulgaria 12
3 Washington,Rhode Island 11
4 Massachusetts 10
5 New Jersey,Virginia,New Hampshire,New York 9
6 British Columbia,Colorado,Connecticut,Arizona, Slovakia 8 Mbit/s
1000 kbit/s is 40 times faster than what some rural residents currently have (28k or 33k analog). And it would be extremely easy to implement - just use the already-existing phone lines that lead in 99.9% of homes. All that's needed is to install the DSLAM and it's done. The entire US could be finished by 1/1/2012.
I've spoken to two people, who formerly had 26k and 33k respectively, and they love the new DSL. They jumped from those slow speed to 1500 and 3000 kbit/s respectively.
But he also dances with wolves, so he can't be all bad.
>>>strangely they still are making a profit.
I don't understand people when they complain about companies making profit. If they weren't making a profit, then there'd be no planes for you to fly, because the companies would be bankrupt. BTW have you ever thought about driving? Back when I traveled a lot from Oklahoma City to Minneapolis, I used to drive. My coworkers flew. They usually arrived at 5 o'clock while I arrived at 6 or 6:30. Not a significant difference but my drive was a lot more relaxing (and cheaper).
I shouldna told ya that. I don't actually have a girlfriend, what with being a nerd and all. Where's the erase button?
My girlfriend's first time was in daddy's bed.
What?
Too soon?
>>>Dinged $25 on the way to Vegas. Then dinged another $52 in resort fees. Sure its *ONLY* $77. But fraud is fraud.
Exaggerate much? I'm sure there's some way you could have avoided those fees, like not carrying luggage or using a different hotel or complaining to your credit card about an unauthorized charge.
In most cases people only get "frauded" if they let themselves. For example I recently was charged $35 late fee for a credit bill I never got. The phone operator refused to do anything, so I got ahold of the supervisor and told him point blank, "Remove the fee or close the card. Your choice." He decided he's rather not lose my ~15,000 a year business and refunded the money.
In another case I was denied a mail-in rebate on a DVD player because I missed the filing deadline - 15 days. I called - they refused to help. I complained to the FTC and they said it was a violation of law - it must be at least 30 days. I called the rebate company again, told them I had talked to the US Government and I'm prepared to file charges if that's what it takes. The supervisor caved and sent me a $25 check.
Point:
Nobody defrauded you. You defrauded yourself. You let them charge that resort fee and you did nothing to fight back. You just rolled-over like a jellyfish. ---- It also sounds like you didn't read the fine print. Like those who claimed they ordered "unlimited" service ven though the contract states otherwise. It's hard to blame others when it's right there in black-and-white: "You will be charged X dollars for extra food," or whatever.
>>>It's like saying a politician told a lie.
Yes but some people still think politicians/government are completely honest so they need a reminder from time to time that they aren't. Likewise some people think Windows is safe. Just this morning a Slashdotter posted that Windows is no more insecure than Linux. This story proves them wrong. (If this was Linux it would be fixed within a week, but some resourceful OSS programmer.)
>>>The whole point of turning off analogue signals is to free up space in the broadcast spectrum
I see you didn't read my post (below), so I'll repeat the relevant bits: Channels 21-30 and 41-62 will still be occupied by DTV, and not freed up. The 31-40 band has an uncertain future but most of the leaders want to reserve it, for future DTV growth. So nothing will be sold off.
>>>I'm curious about what you're doing that makes 8Mb/s slow
The grandparent poster has Spoiled brat syndrome. No matter how much you give 'em, they still are not satisfied. My link's only 0.7 Mbit/s and I think it works just fine even when watching hulu.com or syfy.com. And for bittorrent it downloads faster than I can watch the videos.
Yeah I was right. Channels 21-30 and 41-62 will still be occupied by DTV. Only channels 31-40 will be freed-up, andno plan is set on what to do with them. Some have proposed keeping that space for another DTV multiplex
Your link says nothing about Selling-off channels. My understanding is that the UK DTV will occupy the same space analog TV occupied. (In the same way channels 2 to 51 remained the same in the US.)
>>>My phone bill would pay that off in 1 year to 18 months
That's assuming you buy the Broadband service. If you choose not to, then the fiber just laws idle and the BT company will have lost a huge chunk of cash. ----- Also what kind of frakked-up phone service do you have? Mine is only $15/month and would take over five years time to cover that ~$1000 installation cost. You must be getting ripped-off.
>>>Obviously, all the satellite options suffer from the upstream latency issue for VOIP
(1) How about just using an old-fashioned phone?
(2) You don't have to move there. You made that choice yourself. You lose fast internet, but in return gain the beauty of a rural home. These are the tradeoffs we all choose as a natural part of life - lose some and gain some. If you think internet is more important than just move back to the city or suburb.
I don't recall the UK government selling-off television frequencies?
You're probably thinking of the US (sold off channels 52-82).
I would consider that a misappropriation of funds. Like taxing car drivers to provide free rides to train people. The TV owners shouldn't have to fund other persons' free internet.
Well if you don't believe them, maybe ask Ars Technica. They say the per home of installation of broadband (via fiber) is between 850 and 1300 Euros. Not exactly cheap. IMHO this broadband plan would make more sense:
- Take a page out of the FDR years which mandated telephone companies must wire all homes with telephone lines
- Update the law so it says telephone companies must provide DSL (or FiOS or equivalent service) to all homes by 1/1/2012
- Use the already-existing Universal Service Fund (USF) to cover the costs
Done. Since 99.9% of homes have telephone wires running into them, there's no digging required. No manual labor. No disruption. Simply install a ~$100 DSLAM in each neighborhood. Within a year's time, virtually everyone would have access to 1000 kbit/s or more service. That's 20+ times faster than what they had before (28k or 56k).
>>>Linux isn't any more secure then Windows is.
When Linux develops a hole, it can be immediately plugged by updating the source code. In contrast with Windows you have to sit-and-pray that Microsoft will do something. In most cases they don't - they like to drag their feet. QED linux is more secure.
>>>most of the outgoing signal energy into the palm of your hand."
So now I'm going to get hand cancer, or possibly arthritis? Well that sucks. I'd rather have a stubby antenna sticking out the top of my phone.
Best Buy didn't come out of Circuit City. CC bankrupted and disappeared forever.