>>>That is my right as a voter, and as a thinking man.
Yes but you implied ALL democrats are eloquent speakers, which indicates you don't think at all. You just look at the (D) behind the symbol and automatically assume he/she is a brilliant eloquent person. That's prejudice.
>>>What he meant was "Quiet, you. Children should be seen, not heard."
+1 funny.
If he lives in the EU he may be in violation of the Charter of Rights. Quote: "Children shall have the right to such protection and care as is necessary for their well-being. They may express their views freely. Such views shall be taken into consideration on matters which concern them in accordance with their age and maturity."
>>>>>If this was our standard, people would not be considered adults until age 25 - that's when the brain finishes making its final connections. I think the onset of menarche (typically 15) is a better point to call someone an adult. >> >>I'm making an ASSumption that by that definition you'd still be considered a child.
Yes you are. I'm 35 and an adult no matter how you look at, sexual maturity (14), legal maturity (18), or mental maturity (25).
>>>nor should a 19 year old be punished for having sex with a 17 year old, another form of lunatic overly rigid thinking
YOU are the one who is rigid in your thinking. You don't seem to understand that these arbitrary laws cause more harm than the supposed-creeps running around. The laws ARE the problem. If they were set at a more realistic level (15 instead of 18) then that boyfriend/girlfriend would not have spent a night in jail simply for photographing themselves.
>>>ONLY for the new i5/i7 architecture and beyond...
I for one welcome our new Intel overlords. Maybe Apple will get smart and switch to AMD-based macintoshes. Too bad the 68000 series no longer exists, so we could have some real alternatives.
Public broadcaster NRK reported that US President Barack Obama and French President Nicolas Sarkozy were among the nominees.
Well now I see the CALIBER of the people who win these prizes. French President Sarkozy. Wow. Actually Sarkozy probably would have been a better pick, since he mediated a peace settlement between Georgia and Russia last year. Obama... he uh... um... well he... gave good speak?
There were 203 other people up for the prize. Surely one of them would have been a better pick - like French-Colombian hostage Ingrid Betancourt and Chinese dissident Hu Jia. Or maybe the Cluster Munitions Coalition for getting nearly 100 countries to sign a treaty last year in Oslo banning cluster bombs.
Last year's winner was former Finnish president and career diplomat Martti Ahtisaari for his efforts on several continents, over more than three decades, to resolve international conflicts. This year's winner... um... uh... not really sure.
>>>That is one good thing about Democrats. They speak clearly, unlike the talking chimp that vacated the White House in January. You can't expect a man who can't walk and chew gum at the same time (much less ride a bicycle) to convey a coherent message. >>>
I don't appreciate your insult that D's are superior to R's. As a matter of record the Democrat named Thomas Jefferson stuttered through his inaugural address so badly that listeners could barely understand what he said. It appears lack-of-speaking skills is not just a Republican trait.
Perhaps you should stop pre-judging people based upon arbitrary traits like color of skin, sex, or party affiliation.
I'll buy the whole "man is making the globe warmer" argument AFTER the scientists can explain the previous global warming events from 100 to 1200 A.D. and circa 3000-2000 B.C. Am I supposed to think the Romans and Egyptians burned too much wood, released too much CO2, and that made the globe become warmer?
If not, then couldn't the same mechanism that made the Earth warmer back then, also be responsible now?
Two days ago a boyfriend/girlfriend spent a night in prison for exchanging nude photos over their phones. Isn't THAT a form of brutality against minors? Your lecture on the law sounds good in the abstract, but the practical application of that law is borderline tyrannical. Laws that result in minors being maltreated are just as bad as the pedophiles, and those criminal laws should be executed (repealed).
On June 10, 2009, the Constitutional Council of France struck down the central, controversial, portion of HADOPI, that would have allowed sanctions against internet users accused of copyright violations (as opposed to being convicted for same), ruling that because "the Internet is a component of the freedom of expression" and "in French law the presumption of innocence prevails", only a judge can impose sanctions under the law.
- from wikipedia.
So HADOPI 2 fixes the judge problem, but does it still violate the freedom of expression? The EU Charter of Rights says: "This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers." But I suspect the court will cite Article 17: "Intellectual property shall be protected," and let the law stand.
That's the problem with these poorly-written documents. The law is unclear, and the judges are free to decide whatever they want. Rights are violated when they can be infringed so easily.
>>>It was the same in Italy, another Fascist regime
So in Italy the corporations are private, but the business decisions are made by the government? That's what fascism (aka corporatism) means. It's supposed to be a halfway point between the free market (no government control) and the communist market (government owns everything).
>>>a country does not suck because they have shitty representatives. If they have enough shitty politicians their government might suck
France's democratic government has sucked for about 200 years. Other than a few bright periods of time, they've had tons of lousy leaders. Napoleon was the first - Sarkozy's just the latest in the string. I feel sorry for the French.
But then I remember they have topless beaches, and I figure it's not such a bad country after all.;-)
I think you presume too much when you say "13 is immature" because it depends on the person.
I went to college with a 15-year-old and he was more mature than I was at age 19. And of course being in college, he had sex with coeds five years older than he. Although that was technically illegal (statutory rape), I don't consider it immoral. A young adult is still an adult and should be free to make his own decisions.
>>>The brain hasn't fully developed at 13.
If this was our standard, people would not be considered adults until age 25 - that's when the brain finishes making its final connections. I think the onset of menarche (typically 15) is a better point to call someone an adult.
The key that most of ye are missing, is that while it's possible to upgrade POTS to DSL, and thereby increase from 4000 hertz to >200,000 hertz bandwidth, you can not do that with the radio spectrum. The radio bandwidth is fixed. Engineers working with wireless are doing the equivalent of trying to squeeze more data through a bandwidth-limited 4000 hertz phone line, and there's not way to upgrade it.
>>>DSL is indeed over telephone lines (as normal people understand them).
False. DSL is over a standard twisted-pair line, that is a few hundred feet long, and then converted to higher-quality fiber or coax. It has a bandwidth well over 200,000 hertz, mainly due to the fact it's 99% fiber or coax.
POTS is also twisted-pair, but due to its extreme length (miles and miles), is bandwidth-limited to 4000 hertz wide - about the same as a European AM station. POTS' bandwidth constraint limits it to 56k (digital) or 34k (analog). AM's bandwidth constraint limits it to about 20k (digital radio). If it were possible to send more data over telephone or Digital-AM, then the engineers would have done it. They can't because the universe places restrictions, just as surely as you can not exceed 186,000 miles per second. Good God people! Have you never taken Physics 101???:-|
>>>You don't have to be POTS to be called a "phone line"
Yes. You do. In this discussion we're talking about POTS invented back in the 1800s, not modern systems like SDN or DSL, and POTS is defined as having a 4000 hertz bandwidth. If you're going to build a POTS-compatible modem, you are confined by that limit, just as the FCC in this article is constrained by the size of the radio spectrum. Get it?
Now first off, I'm not sure why you're trying to bring Nyquist's Theorem into this discussion. (snip). Shannon's Limit is a much better an example. (snip). So you see, I do not need to change any universal laws, when they do not actually prevent me from doing something.
Okay.
Y'all think the 56k speed limit on telephone modems is non-existent. Fine. Prove me wrong. Build a modem that goes faster. I would love to buy a dialup modem that gets 128k or 200k, especially for my laptop when I'm stuck in hotels with nothing but a phone-based internet.
Ye seem so damn sure the 56k limit for a 4000-hertz-wide telephone doesn't exist (or the 20k limit for Digital AM radio). You build it. I'll buy it.
>>>To say that an analog medium [space] has defined universal limits [186,000 miles per second] and that no technology is capable of using it more efficiently sounds like a BS assertion, i think you should cite some sources for a claim like that. >>>
I edited your sentence, because that's essentially what you're saying. You are in denial of basic facts - the universe DOES place limits upon human beings. The radio spectrum DOES have a "speed limit" on how much data can be squeezed in each XX megahertz-wide channel.
>>>The concept of phase encoding had never before been practical - now it is the ONLY way we encode things. What's next???
Trellis modulation. With phase encoding the speed limit of a modem was limited to 14k, but with trellis modulation they were able to get 34k. Then they went to digital encoding which maxes-out the telephone line to 56k. The end. That's the physical limit of the universe - you cannot get any more data through a 4000-hertz-limited telephone line.
Your phone line also has a very definite physical limit..... It's also precisely what the FCC is talking about here -- the medium itself has a limit and no encoding is going to change that. Better encodings simply get closer to the ultimate physical limit, and modern encodings are pretty much perfect already.
QFT. (quoted for truth). At last somebody understands. If you have a fixed width of spectrum (4000 hertz) you can only squeeze so much data through it (56k).
The fact that there are engineers on here claiming you can squeeze as much data as you want through a 4000-hertz limit is extremely depressing.
>>>the only difference is that instead of sending sound (analog) down the wire they send electrical pulses, 1s and 0s: digital data.
56k digital modems also use 1s and 0s (duh). Pure analog modems max-out at about 34k. And the maximum exists because when you limit yourself to a 4000 hertz wide spectrum, you are confined by the physical limits or the universe. On telephone wires, that limit is 7 bits * 4000 Hz * 2 == 56000. On broadcast Digital AM radio, it's about 20,000 bits/second.
Basic math. Basic physics. Freshman level. If you have an engineering degree you should hand it back. .
>>>adsl can do 24Mbits/s on a single pair of plain old telephone wire.
Incorrect. ADSL disconnects the old telephone wire (4000 hertz limit) and reconnects it to high-quality fiber or coax (unlimited). It is NO longer part of the old 1800s-era telephone system. It's an entirely new technology.
>>>This is why this whole thread about inadequate bandwidth is totally nonsense. New technology and totally different ways of using what we already have will continue to produce ever more information density in the same radio spectrum. >>>
Except you cannot change the laws of physics. A 20 megahertz channel (i.e. the entire with of FM radio) can only carry 330 Mbit/s per Nyquist's Theorem. That is the physical limit imposed by the universe and you will never exceed it.
>>>ADSL uses the exact same two wire copper pair that your analog signal used to use. Its the same infrastructure you had previously. In most cases the switch to adsl uses the EXACT same physical stretch of wire. >>>
Not only are you wrong, but you managed to be wrong three times. The old telephone wire and the new DSL is NOT the same copper pair, not the same infrastructure, and not the same physical stretch of wire. Here are the differences:
- The old telephone infrastructure was bandlimited to 4000 hertz. DSL is not. - The old telephone copper traveled miles-and-miles, and was very poor quality due to that long distance. - DSL is terminated just a few hundred feet from your house (before the signal degrades), and then upgraded to high-quality fiber or coax which carries the signal over long distances. DSL is 99.9% fiber/coax with just a little bit of copper at the end. - QED not the same system or infrastructure or copper (since DSL is mostly carried by fiber).
>>>sell you an ADSL modem which they hook up to the EXACT SAME WIRES
Not true. What used to be a tens of miles long low-quality telephone cable is now truncated just a few hundred feet from your home, and then upgraded to fiber or coax. NOT the same wires or system or bandwidth limitations (4000 hertz).
>>>The sheer fucking ARROGANCE of the concept of a ratings board playing a game and then banning it is what I find the most disgusting. I don't want to play a 95% version of L4D2 because some people in my country decided that, while THEY weren't harmed from playing it, would DEFINITELY cause harm to others who can't help themselves. >>>
You just gave the short definition of government - other people trying to control your life, because they consider you an inferior serf. These control freaks are also known as tyrants. They deserve to be shot or guillotined.
Slashdot Mirror
>>>That is my right as a voter, and as a thinking man.
Yes but you implied ALL democrats are eloquent speakers, which indicates you don't think at all. You just look at the (D) behind the symbol and automatically assume he/she is a brilliant eloquent person. That's prejudice.
>>>What he meant was "Quiet, you. Children should be seen, not heard."
+1 funny.
If he lives in the EU he may be in violation of the Charter of Rights. Quote: "Children shall have the right to such protection and care as is necessary for their well-being. They may express their views freely. Such views shall be taken into consideration on matters which concern them in accordance with their age and maturity."
>>>>>If this was our standard, people would not be considered adults until age 25 - that's when the brain finishes making its final connections. I think the onset of menarche (typically 15) is a better point to call someone an adult.
>>
>>I'm making an ASSumption that by that definition you'd still be considered a child.
Yes you are. I'm 35 and an adult no matter how you look at, sexual maturity (14), legal maturity (18), or mental maturity (25).
>>>nor should a 19 year old be punished for having sex with a 17 year old, another form of lunatic overly rigid thinking
YOU are the one who is rigid in your thinking. You don't seem to understand that these arbitrary laws cause more harm than the supposed-creeps running around. The laws ARE the problem. If they were set at a more realistic level (15 instead of 18) then that boyfriend/girlfriend would not have spent a night in jail simply for photographing themselves.
>>>ONLY for the new i5/i7 architecture and beyond...
I for one welcome our new Intel overlords. Maybe Apple will get smart and switch to AMD-based macintoshes. Too bad the 68000 series no longer exists, so we could have some real alternatives.
Public broadcaster NRK reported that US President Barack Obama and French President Nicolas Sarkozy were among the nominees.
Well now I see the CALIBER of the people who win these prizes. French President Sarkozy. Wow. Actually Sarkozy probably would have been a better pick, since he mediated a peace settlement between Georgia and Russia last year. Obama... he uh... um... well he... gave good speak?
There were 203 other people up for the prize. Surely one of them would have been a better pick - like French-Colombian hostage Ingrid Betancourt and Chinese dissident Hu Jia. Or maybe the Cluster Munitions Coalition for getting nearly 100 countries to sign a treaty last year in Oslo banning cluster bombs.
Last year's winner was former Finnish president and career diplomat Martti Ahtisaari for his efforts on several continents, over more than three decades, to resolve international conflicts. This year's winner... um... uh... not really sure.
>>>That is one good thing about Democrats. They speak clearly, unlike the talking chimp that vacated the White House in January. You can't expect a man who can't walk and chew gum at the same time (much less ride a bicycle) to convey a coherent message.
>>>
I don't appreciate your insult that D's are superior to R's. As a matter of record the Democrat named Thomas Jefferson stuttered through his inaugural address so badly that listeners could barely understand what he said. It appears lack-of-speaking skills is not just a Republican trait.
Perhaps you should stop pre-judging people based upon arbitrary traits like color of skin, sex, or party affiliation.
I'll buy the whole "man is making the globe warmer" argument AFTER the scientists can explain the previous global warming events from 100 to 1200 A.D. and circa 3000-2000 B.C. Am I supposed to think the Romans and Egyptians burned too much wood, released too much CO2, and that made the globe become warmer?
If not, then couldn't the same mechanism that made the Earth warmer back then, also be responsible now?
>>>and sex with with minors IS brutality
Two days ago a boyfriend/girlfriend spent a night in prison for exchanging nude photos over their phones. Isn't THAT a form of brutality against minors? Your lecture on the law sounds good in the abstract, but the practical application of that law is borderline tyrannical. Laws that result in minors being maltreated are just as bad as the pedophiles, and those criminal laws should be executed (repealed).
On June 10, 2009, the Constitutional Council of France struck down the central, controversial, portion of HADOPI, that would have allowed sanctions against internet users accused of copyright violations (as opposed to being convicted for same), ruling that because "the Internet is a component of the freedom of expression" and "in French law the presumption of innocence prevails", only a judge can impose sanctions under the law.
- from wikipedia.
So HADOPI 2 fixes the judge problem, but does it still violate the freedom of expression? The EU Charter of Rights says: "This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers." But I suspect the court will cite Article 17: "Intellectual property shall be protected," and let the law stand.
That's the problem with these poorly-written documents. The law is unclear, and the judges are free to decide whatever they want. Rights are violated when they can be infringed so easily.
>>>It was the same in Italy, another Fascist regime
So in Italy the corporations are private, but the business decisions are made by the government? That's what fascism (aka corporatism) means. It's supposed to be a halfway point between the free market (no government control) and the communist market (government owns everything).
>>>a country does not suck because they have shitty representatives. If they have enough shitty politicians their government might suck
France's democratic government has sucked for about 200 years. Other than a few bright periods of time, they've had tons of lousy leaders. Napoleon was the first - Sarkozy's just the latest in the string. I feel sorry for the French.
But then I remember they have topless beaches, and I figure it's not such a bad country after all. ;-)
I think you presume too much when you say "13 is immature" because it depends on the person.
I went to college with a 15-year-old and he was more mature than I was at age 19. And of course being in college, he had sex with coeds five years older than he. Although that was technically illegal (statutory rape), I don't consider it immoral. A young adult is still an adult and should be free to make his own decisions.
>>>The brain hasn't fully developed at 13.
If this was our standard, people would not be considered adults until age 25 - that's when the brain finishes making its final connections. I think the onset of menarche (typically 15) is a better point to call someone an adult.
The key that most of ye are missing, is that while it's possible to upgrade POTS to DSL, and thereby increase from 4000 hertz to >200,000 hertz bandwidth, you can not do that with the radio spectrum. The radio bandwidth is fixed. Engineers working with wireless are doing the equivalent of trying to squeeze more data through a bandwidth-limited 4000 hertz phone line, and there's not way to upgrade it.
>>>DSL is indeed over telephone lines (as normal people understand them).
False. DSL is over a standard twisted-pair line, that is a few hundred feet long, and then converted to higher-quality fiber or coax. It has a bandwidth well over 200,000 hertz, mainly due to the fact it's 99% fiber or coax.
POTS is also twisted-pair, but due to its extreme length (miles and miles), is bandwidth-limited to 4000 hertz wide - about the same as a European AM station. POTS' bandwidth constraint limits it to 56k (digital) or 34k (analog). AM's bandwidth constraint limits it to about 20k (digital radio). If it were possible to send more data over telephone or Digital-AM, then the engineers would have done it. They can't because the universe places restrictions, just as surely as you can not exceed 186,000 miles per second. Good God people! Have you never taken Physics 101??? :-|
>>>You don't have to be POTS to be called a "phone line"
Yes. You do. In this discussion we're talking about POTS invented back in the 1800s, not modern systems like SDN or DSL, and POTS is defined as having a 4000 hertz bandwidth. If you're going to build a POTS-compatible modem, you are confined by that limit, just as the FCC in this article is constrained by the size of the radio spectrum. Get it?
Now first off, I'm not sure why you're trying to bring Nyquist's Theorem into this discussion. (snip). Shannon's Limit is a much better an example. (snip). So you see, I do not need to change any universal laws, when they do not actually prevent me from doing something.
Okay.
Y'all think the 56k speed limit on telephone modems is non-existent. Fine. Prove me wrong. Build a modem that goes faster. I would love to buy a dialup modem that gets 128k or 200k, especially for my laptop when I'm stuck in hotels with nothing but a phone-based internet.
Ye seem so damn sure the 56k limit for a 4000-hertz-wide telephone doesn't exist (or the 20k limit for Digital AM radio). You build it. I'll buy it.
>>>To say that an analog medium [space] has defined universal limits [186,000 miles per second] and that no technology is capable of using it more efficiently sounds like a BS assertion, i think you should cite some sources for a claim like that.
>>>
I edited your sentence, because that's essentially what you're saying. You are in denial of basic facts - the universe DOES place limits upon human beings. The radio spectrum DOES have a "speed limit" on how much data can be squeezed in each XX megahertz-wide channel.
Wow. Cell towers every 1/4 mile. That will be attractive. Might look something like this:
http://pro.corbis.com/images/IH172885.jpg?size=67&uid=77B92ED2-843B-4F46-9484-2496E45AE139 http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2071/1943018955_52100c0f4d.jpg
Why would we want our modern 2000-era cityscape to look like something from the late 1800s cityscape?
>>>The concept of phase encoding had never before been practical - now it is the ONLY way we encode things. What's next???
Trellis modulation. With phase encoding the speed limit of a modem was limited to 14k, but with trellis modulation they were able to get 34k. Then they went to digital encoding which maxes-out the telephone line to 56k. The end. That's the physical limit of the universe - you cannot get any more data through a 4000-hertz-limited telephone line.
Your phone line also has a very definite physical limit..... It's also precisely what the FCC is talking about here -- the medium itself has a limit and no encoding is going to change that. Better encodings simply get closer to the ultimate physical limit, and modern encodings are pretty much perfect already.
QFT. (quoted for truth). At last somebody understands. If you have a fixed width of spectrum (4000 hertz) you can only squeeze so much data through it (56k).
The fact that there are engineers on here claiming you can squeeze as much data as you want through a 4000-hertz limit is extremely depressing.
P.S.
>>>the only difference is that instead of sending sound (analog) down the wire they send electrical pulses, 1s and 0s: digital data.
56k digital modems also use 1s and 0s (duh). Pure analog modems max-out at about 34k. And the maximum exists because when you limit yourself to a 4000 hertz wide spectrum, you are confined by the physical limits or the universe. On telephone wires, that limit is 7 bits * 4000 Hz * 2 == 56000. On broadcast Digital AM radio, it's about 20,000 bits/second.
Basic math. Basic physics. Freshman level. If you have an engineering degree you should hand it back.
.
>>>adsl can do 24Mbits/s on a single pair of plain old telephone wire.
Incorrect. ADSL disconnects the old telephone wire (4000 hertz limit) and reconnects it to high-quality fiber or coax (unlimited). It is NO longer part of the old 1800s-era telephone system. It's an entirely new technology.
>>>This is why this whole thread about inadequate bandwidth is totally nonsense. New technology and totally different ways of using what we already have will continue to produce ever more information density in the same radio spectrum.
>>>
Except you cannot change the laws of physics. A 20 megahertz channel (i.e. the entire with of FM radio) can only carry 330 Mbit/s per Nyquist's Theorem. That is the physical limit imposed by the universe and you will never exceed it.
>>>ADSL uses the exact same two wire copper pair that your analog signal used to use. Its the same infrastructure you had previously. In most cases the switch to adsl uses the EXACT same physical stretch of wire.
>>>
Not only are you wrong, but you managed to be wrong three times. The old telephone wire and the new DSL is NOT the same copper pair, not the same infrastructure, and not the same physical stretch of wire. Here are the differences:
- The old telephone infrastructure was bandlimited to 4000 hertz. DSL is not.
- The old telephone copper traveled miles-and-miles, and was very poor quality due to that long distance.
- DSL is terminated just a few hundred feet from your house (before the signal degrades), and then upgraded to high-quality fiber or coax which carries the signal over long distances. DSL is 99.9% fiber/coax with just a little bit of copper at the end.
- QED not the same system or infrastructure or copper (since DSL is mostly carried by fiber).
>>>sell you an ADSL modem which they hook up to the EXACT SAME WIRES
Not true. What used to be a tens of miles long low-quality telephone cable is now truncated just a few hundred feet from your home, and then upgraded to fiber or coax. NOT the same wires or system or bandwidth limitations (4000 hertz).
>>>The sheer fucking ARROGANCE of the concept of a ratings board playing a game and then banning it is what I find the most disgusting. I don't want to play a 95% version of L4D2 because some people in my country decided that, while THEY weren't harmed from playing it, would DEFINITELY cause harm to others who can't help themselves.
>>>
You just gave the short definition of government - other people trying to control your life, because they consider you an inferior serf. These control freaks are also known as tyrants. They deserve to be shot or guillotined.