All these ideas are entirely possible but it could simply be that Comcast doesn't provide the kind of broadband consistently necessary to use VoIP.
Well, there is an easy test. If their VOIP works fine and other people's don't then they are probably gumming up the lines with QoS. ISPs have been working on different levels of service for differently labeled packet s of data for a while now and I think it should be clear to everyone that QoS really stands for "pick your pocket", not "quality of service". Quality of Service is fine when companies like Comcast don't have local monopolies or don't collude with their only other competitor... potentially that would be Verizon in my area, in order to fix service offerings.
I am libertarian, but QoS (or whatever they want to relabel it as) is an area which needs regulation. Make them simple regulations, make them so that they promote competition. Unfortunately maybe the only way to do this is to prevent ISPs from offering any add on services at all, other than basic bandwidth, addressibility and letting them charge flat published and competitive rates for QoS which get charged directly to the customer and aren't a part of secret deals. Otherwise it will be nearly impossible to prevent them from deciding which services succeed and which ones fail if they control the playing field, the referees and have their players in the game all at the same time. If gone unchecked, they could prevent other companies and other services from being provided to their customers, literally, at the flip of a switch.
Re:Do we have evidence that Intel coerced...
on
AMD Subpoenas Skype
·
· Score: 1
it seems to me that 'secret shoppers' walk the line of price fixing...
Yes, prior collusion is no longer really needed for price fixing, as you can instantly see what your competitors are charging in many cases. So theoretically you could "walk up" the price together. But you still have to have a general sense of agreement not to undercut your competitors inflated prices. All it takes is one competitor with enough capacity or inventory and a desire to increase their marketshare to bring competitive pressure to bear.
Re:Do we have evidence that Intel coerced...
on
AMD Subpoenas Skype
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Skype into this relationship? Why is this not a perfectly acceptable competitive advantage offered to a partner?
You are right, Anti-competitive practices are perfectly acceptible in a free market. If, I want to bundle my stereo system with a certain type of car because that car company has paid me to do so or vice versa or has some other mutually beneficial deal, that is perfectly acceptible. But as companies approach having a dominant marketshare we have decided that it is not acceptible any longer because of the ability of one company to extend a monopoly into other areas via these anti-competitive business relationships. There is no question that this practice is anti-competitive in nature, the real question however is does Intel really have that great a market dominance anymore that they could harm the marketplace with this kind of deal.
For similar reasons competing companies are not allowed to engage in price fixing even though it is perfectly fine for them to determine their own prices. Even though it might help the companies involved it will have the effect of hurting the overall marketplace.
So, no it is not about coercion. It is about what kind of collusion between what are supposed to be independent companies we will allow in a free market. And what kind of bundling of services we will allow a dominant company to do when it will exclude competition arbitrarily.
What would be needed to make this happen? Maybe an external USB CableCard 2.0 slot? Or a USB HD tuner? Seems the Mac Mini could already be a very nice media center and could support downloadable content with a broadband connection. Just need something along these lines as an add-ons.
But a CableCard 2.0 slot would be key to any media center, or else having the option of connecting a cablecard 2.0 device to the mini via firewire or USB.
I gave up when I couldn't find a live CD yet that supports my laptop's Wi-fi card. That's what I mean.
Yes, I installed ubuntu on my Dell Laptop and everything was great except for the wi-fi card. I installed ndiswrapper and got the windows driver, but all I got was it to recognize the card was there, but not actually make a connection to my wireless gateway. Wireless can sometimes be tricky I realize, but I expect an application to give you more information to help troubleshoot the problem. Instead it just sits there and doesn't say where it is failing. Heck I would buy a new card if it had drivers that were easy to install. I don't expect Linux to work with every piece of hardware, just to work well with some hardware.
Apple would probably be better off product wise just developing its own cell phone, but I think Palm has quite a lot of prexisting business relationships which would make it easier for Apple to slip into the market. Not to mention that Palm has experience jumping through the regulatory hurdles of the FCC and other National regulatory agencies.
So sure they could just build a new product line in house, like they did with the iPod. But sometimes it is good to go with a sure thing. And to come out with itunes software that was unlimited for Palm PDAs and smartphones would likely be pretty simple.
It would get them back into the PDA game and more importantly it would get them into smartphones with the treo line without having to start from scratch with an ipod smartphone. And with a market cap under 2 billion for Palm, it would still leave Apple with plenty of cash for other capital expenditures or aquisistions.
Though, with that much money they could afford to just start new development of new products and services themselves and not attempt a merging of cultures and businesses.
The future is in unencumbereddownloadable content.
Not necessarily. iTunes are encumbered, but the player can play mp3s and other formats and iTunes has been a success. I think there is room for some copy disabled content, but it will be the exception rather than the rule.
The RIAA doesn't have the power to overrule the "first-sale" doctrine. You can resell an HD-DVD if you want, and it's none of their business.
Maybe, but maybe they will make it their business. With their AACS, they could make each movie licensed to a particular piece of hardware. This would require the player to be hooked up to the Internet or a phone line to get the initial license, but it is possible.
HD-DVD and Blueray are both garbage because of all this disableware they want to throw in. The future is in downloadable content.
Wind power shows some promise but is associated with bird and bat kills and can never scale up to meet our energy consumption.
Come on, I agree with you about nuclear being an important and proven technology and that wind alone will not scale to meet the needs of hundreds of millions of people. But bird kills? The only place in the world that has significant problems with birdkills is that old windfarm in California that has hundreds of little fast rotating wind turbines mounted on towers with plentiful roosting spots... and it is situated in a migratory flyway. We have learned a lot from that and the wind tech has gotten a lot better. Big is the answer, the bigger the better. Big wind turbines, in the 1-2 Megawatt range, have slower rotation and are less likely to slice and dice our little birdy friends. And mounting on smooth poles cuts down on birds landing and taking off from the towers themselves. which was a big problem in california. And since these new generation of wind turbines are bigger and spaced further apart there is more room for birds to fly in between them.
Really, the problem that you cite is not a problem anymore. But no wind turbines are not the answer. And I think we would be foolish to rely upon just one technology as a panacea. But I also think you would be foolish to pass up wind if you live in a coastal or mountain area or any area with pretty constant wind and enough space to have these big 2 megawatt wind towers:
However, this is not to say that such endeavors are not worth doing. I'm all for big companies striving to make the world a better place.
I'm not. Individual's have morals, Companies have mission statements. And the best we should expect from their management is that they act ethically in their business dealings, towards their customers and employees. But I think it is up to people to do good things towards others.
Google should reward its employees enough and give them enough spare time to contribute to their own good works. Google.org should limit itself to providing free banner ads for deserving non profits or donating its software to charities to use for their internal email and searching needs. But Water purification? Larry and Sergey are wealthy enough now to set up their own foundations and they should do so. If they want to clean some water, then just write a check and start sending some of those Kamen machines over. But if they want to help African, then they will open offices there and start employing people and building infrastructure.
Africa looks pretty blank to me, on this map (South American and SouthEast Asia don't look much better):
OH WHY can't they work together on the underlying front??
Because the People's Liberation Front of Underlying (or is it the Underlying People's Liberation Front) is far superior to the just the plain Underlying Front. Jeez, some people.
It demeans me that you're complaining about it, like somehow affordable appliances aren't good enough. When Africans can afford $2000 windmills, they'll be there. Until then, save the high-priced handouts for Americans who need help. There are a million of them who lost their homes in Katrina, remember?
You should have just said "Fuck Africa" right from the start. It would have been more clear.
For a second I thought you were arguing about the economics of wind power for rural areas.
In the long term, we'll see how much aluminum is left after giving Americans windmills... mmkay?
What's with the fixation on aluminum? We are using it for disposable soda cans, it isn't like there is a scarcity.
Your whole attitude seems very paternalistic and demeaning, if you are going to help people then help them, don't just create a new dependency which you can take advantage of later. Let them learn from our mistakes rather than make them repeat them just because that is the way we did it.
Otherwise they are better off with their dirty water. We all die eventually, better to die free at a younger age then to live longer as a slave to Western Colonialism.
Remember, better teach a man to fish than to give him one.
But, for now, I think we'll reserve wind power for the first and second worlds and limit hand-outs to technologies that are more fool-proof and less capital-intensive, if more labor-intensive.
There is nothing inherently more expensive or complicated about wind power that our poorer brethren would have difficulty with. Yes it isn't as constant a source of power, but you could store water after it has been purified during windy times and burning cow dung isn't going to always be reliable either. And burning cow dung, wood, whatever won't help people in the long run, or even the medium term, because they likely need those resources for fertilizer, shelter, etc. Wind Power on the other hand would be getting something for just the capital cost.
Wind power is about as simple as it gets. Put some blades on a turbine and stick it on a tall poll. The bigger the better. Can do it on the cheap, if you don't mind a little noise in high wind, for well under a $1000.
But becoming reliant on just one source though might not do anyone any good. Maybe better to use the Dung burner for less windy days and take a break and let the wind do the job on the other days.
What he should be doing is marketing this to rural farmers in developed countries. If I lived on a farm with access to the fuel, I would love to have a kilowatt generator for $1000 to supplement my electricity use.
A kilowatt generator for a $1000 isn't a great deal, you can get those for $150. You could even get a 1000 watt wind turbine for $2,115 and you wouldn't need fuel.
Actually, if a place had steady wind, then I'd say forget about the power generator part and you'll save yourself a lot of trouble with a wind turbine or two.
That brings up a point though, when you are talking about new infrastructure you should make sure that the local people themselves can afford its upkeep otherwise you will be making them dependent on political handouts forever.
Which is why an external regulatory agent is needed (even though that idea is apparently blasphemous to the US mindset).
Regulation? We already have laws against hacking people's computers and causing damage. Sony needs to be prosecuted, not regulated. Sony commited a felony and DHS wants to turn this into a beaurocratic exercise. This is in the FBI's and Attorney General's realm, not DHS.
DHS should stick to what it is good at, screwing up responses to national disasters, oh wait.
Slashdot Mirror
With 20 years of inflation, a hot dog is going to cost $15 million. Want real beef that will be an extra 2 million.
A $200 million budget will be considered a home movie.
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=178977&cid =14834963
Just move it all to Sealand and live in peace. I think with google's backing Sealand could expand a little.
All these ideas are entirely possible but it could simply be that Comcast doesn't provide the kind of broadband consistently necessary to use VoIP.
Well, there is an easy test. If their VOIP works fine and other people's don't then they are probably gumming up the lines with QoS. ISPs have been working on different levels of service for differently labeled packet s of data for a while now and I think it should be clear to everyone that QoS really stands for "pick your pocket", not "quality of service". Quality of Service is fine when companies like Comcast don't have local monopolies or don't collude with their only other competitor... potentially that would be Verizon in my area, in order to fix service offerings.
I am libertarian, but QoS (or whatever they want to relabel it as) is an area which needs regulation. Make them simple regulations, make them so that they promote competition. Unfortunately maybe the only way to do this is to prevent ISPs from offering any add on services at all, other than basic bandwidth, addressibility and letting them charge flat published and competitive rates for QoS which get charged directly to the customer and aren't a part of secret deals. Otherwise it will be nearly impossible to prevent them from deciding which services succeed and which ones fail if they control the playing field, the referees and have their players in the game all at the same time. If gone unchecked, they could prevent other companies and other services from being provided to their customers, literally, at the flip of a switch.
it seems to me that 'secret shoppers' walk the line of price fixing...
Yes, prior collusion is no longer really needed for price fixing, as you can instantly see what your competitors are charging in many cases. So theoretically you could "walk up" the price together. But you still have to have a general sense of agreement not to undercut your competitors inflated prices. All it takes is one competitor with enough capacity or inventory and a desire to increase their marketshare to bring competitive pressure to bear.
Skype into this relationship? Why is this not a perfectly acceptable competitive advantage offered to a partner?
You are right, Anti-competitive practices are perfectly acceptible in a free market. If, I want to bundle my stereo system with a certain type of car because that car company has paid me to do so or vice versa or has some other mutually beneficial deal, that is perfectly acceptible. But as companies approach having a dominant marketshare we have decided that it is not acceptible any longer because of the ability of one company to extend a monopoly into other areas via these anti-competitive business relationships. There is no question that this practice is anti-competitive in nature, the real question however is does Intel really have that great a market dominance anymore that they could harm the marketplace with this kind of deal.
For similar reasons competing companies are not allowed to engage in price fixing even though it is perfectly fine for them to determine their own prices. Even though it might help the companies involved it will have the effect of hurting the overall marketplace.
So, no it is not about coercion. It is about what kind of collusion between what are supposed to be independent companies we will allow in a free market. And what kind of bundling of services we will allow a dominant company to do when it will exclude competition arbitrarily.
What would be needed to make this happen? Maybe an external USB CableCard 2.0 slot? Or a USB HD tuner? Seems the Mac Mini could already be a very nice media center and could support downloadable content with a broadband connection. Just need something along these lines as an add-ons.
But a CableCard 2.0 slot would be key to any media center, or else having the option of connecting a cablecard 2.0 device to the mini via firewire or USB.
Inspiron 8200 running ubuntu.
I gave up when I couldn't find a live CD yet that supports my laptop's Wi-fi card. That's what I mean.
Yes, I installed ubuntu on my Dell Laptop and everything was great except for the wi-fi card. I installed ndiswrapper and got the windows driver, but all I got was it to recognize the card was there, but not actually make a connection to my wireless gateway. Wireless can sometimes be tricky I realize, but I expect an application to give you more information to help troubleshoot the problem. Instead it just sits there and doesn't say where it is failing. Heck I would buy a new card if it had drivers that were easy to install. I don't expect Linux to work with every piece of hardware, just to work well with some hardware.
Apple would probably be better off product wise just developing its own cell phone, but I think Palm has quite a lot of prexisting business relationships which would make it easier for Apple to slip into the market. Not to mention that Palm has experience jumping through the regulatory hurdles of the FCC and other National regulatory agencies.
So sure they could just build a new product line in house, like they did with the iPod. But sometimes it is good to go with a sure thing. And to come out with itunes software that was unlimited for Palm PDAs and smartphones would likely be pretty simple.
Buying Palm would seem a better fit. story
It would get them back into the PDA game and more importantly it would get them into smartphones with the treo line without having to start from scratch with an ipod smartphone. And with a market cap under 2 billion for Palm, it would still leave Apple with plenty of cash for other capital expenditures or aquisistions.
Though, with that much money they could afford to just start new development of new products and services themselves and not attempt a merging of cultures and businesses.
or to stall the market until computer-based VOD can take over.
try doing a google search for "downloadable HD content" and see what you get. I'll give you a hint:
The future is in unencumbereddownloadable content.
Not necessarily. iTunes are encumbered, but the player can play mp3s and other formats and iTunes has been a success. I think there is room for some copy disabled content, but it will be the exception rather than the rule.
The RIAA doesn't have the power to overrule the "first-sale" doctrine. You can resell an HD-DVD if you want, and it's none of their business.
Maybe, but maybe they will make it their business. With their AACS, they could make each movie licensed to a particular piece of hardware. This would require the player to be hooked up to the Internet or a phone line to get the initial license, but it is possible.
HD-DVD and Blueray are both garbage because of all this disableware they want to throw in. The future is in downloadable content.
Solar doesn't work well for everyone. A few things...
not everyone has a conveniently South facing roof, which greatly adds to the expense and/or efficiency.
There are significant variations in solar's potential between different areas of the country: http://www.mrsolar.com/faq/insol/usa.htm
Wind power shows some promise but is associated with bird and bat kills and can never scale up to meet our energy consumption.
Come on, I agree with you about nuclear being an important and proven technology and that wind alone will not scale to meet the needs of hundreds of millions of people. But bird kills? The only place in the world that has significant problems with birdkills is that old windfarm in California that has hundreds of little fast rotating wind turbines mounted on towers with plentiful roosting spots... and it is situated in a migratory flyway. We have learned a lot from that and the wind tech has gotten a lot better. Big is the answer, the bigger the better. Big wind turbines, in the 1-2 Megawatt range, have slower rotation and are less likely to slice and dice our little birdy friends. And mounting on smooth poles cuts down on birds landing and taking off from the towers themselves. which was a big problem in california. And since these new generation of wind turbines are bigger and spaced further apart there is more room for birds to fly in between them.
Really, the problem that you cite is not a problem anymore. But no wind turbines are not the answer. And I think we would be foolish to rely upon just one technology as a panacea. But I also think you would be foolish to pass up wind if you live in a coastal or mountain area or any area with pretty constant wind and enough space to have these big 2 megawatt wind towers:
http://www.hullwind.org/
However, this is not to say that such endeavors are not worth doing. I'm all for big companies striving to make the world a better place.
I'm not. Individual's have morals, Companies have mission statements. And the best we should expect from their management is that they act ethically in their business dealings, towards their customers and employees. But I think it is up to people to do good things towards others.
Google should reward its employees enough and give them enough spare time to contribute to their own good works. Google.org should limit itself to providing free banner ads for deserving non profits or donating its software to charities to use for their internal email and searching needs. But Water purification? Larry and Sergey are wealthy enough now to set up their own foundations and they should do so. If they want to clean some water, then just write a check and start sending some of those Kamen machines over. But if they want to help African, then they will open offices there and start employing people and building infrastructure.
Africa looks pretty blank to me, on this map (South American and SouthEast Asia don't look much better):
http://www.google.com/corporate/address.html
OH WHY can't they work together on the underlying front??
Because the People's Liberation Front of Underlying (or is it the Underlying People's Liberation Front) is far superior to the just the plain Underlying Front. Jeez, some people.
It demeans me that you're complaining about it, like somehow affordable appliances aren't good enough. When Africans can afford $2000 windmills, they'll be there. Until then, save the high-priced handouts for Americans who need help. There are a million of them who lost their homes in Katrina, remember?
You should have just said "Fuck Africa" right from the start. It would have been more clear.
For a second I thought you were arguing about the economics of wind power for rural areas.
In the long term, we'll see how much aluminum is left after giving Americans windmills... mmkay?
What's with the fixation on aluminum? We are using it for disposable soda cans, it isn't like there is a scarcity.
Your whole attitude seems very paternalistic and demeaning, if you are going to help people then help them, don't just create a new dependency which you can take advantage of later. Let them learn from our mistakes rather than make them repeat them just because that is the way we did it.
Otherwise they are better off with their dirty water. We all die eventually, better to die free at a younger age then to live longer as a slave to Western Colonialism.
Remember, better teach a man to fish than to give him one.
But, for now, I think we'll reserve wind power for the first and second worlds and limit hand-outs to technologies that are more fool-proof and less capital-intensive, if more labor-intensive.
There is nothing inherently more expensive or complicated about wind power that our poorer brethren would have difficulty with. Yes it isn't as constant a source of power, but you could store water after it has been purified during windy times and burning cow dung isn't going to always be reliable either. And burning cow dung, wood, whatever won't help people in the long run, or even the medium term, because they likely need those resources for fertilizer, shelter, etc. Wind Power on the other hand would be getting something for just the capital cost.
Wind power is about as simple as it gets. Put some blades on a turbine and stick it on a tall poll. The bigger the better. Can do it on the cheap, if you don't mind a little noise in high wind, for well under a $1000.
But becoming reliant on just one source though might not do anyone any good. Maybe better to use the Dung burner for less windy days and take a break and let the wind do the job on the other days.
Can't you ascertain intent from action?
What he should be doing is marketing this to rural farmers in developed countries. If I lived on a farm with access to the fuel, I would love to have a kilowatt generator for $1000 to supplement my electricity use.
A kilowatt generator for a $1000 isn't a great deal, you can get those for $150. You could even get a 1000 watt wind turbine for $2,115
and you wouldn't need fuel.
Actually, if a place had steady wind, then I'd say forget about the power generator part and you'll save yourself a lot of trouble with a wind turbine or two.
That brings up a point though, when you are talking about new infrastructure you should make sure that the local people themselves can afford its upkeep otherwise you will be making them dependent on political handouts forever.
Hopefully this little 'mishap' will be the thing that makes it such that all our new LCD monitors aren't obsolete after all.
As if anyone here needs reminding, planned obsolescence isn't part of Linux and free software. So, Penguin away and be happy.
Which is why an external regulatory agent is needed (even though that idea is apparently blasphemous to the US mindset).
Regulation? We already have laws against hacking people's computers and causing damage. Sony needs to be prosecuted, not regulated. Sony commited a felony and DHS wants to turn this into a beaurocratic exercise. This is in the FBI's and Attorney General's realm, not DHS.
DHS should stick to what it is good at, screwing up responses to national disasters, oh wait.