Maybe because you are making yourself out to be pretty dumb. 500 miles from the epicenter of the quake is still pretty damn close. The power went out, and the backup power failed, possibly because the backup generators were damaged by the quake or tsunami? Then eventually the batteries that are the backup to the backup ran out of juice, and the pumps shutdown. A modern design say from France, or elsewhere would have then immediately SCRAMed, unfortunately, these old designs don't do that. It is a poor design, that has been retired, and even in the worst case, the nuclear release is small and quickly decays.
I wouldn't know what a Republican would understand, as I am more Libritarian leaning. But in general, people don't finance bridges of this magnatude. Frankly, looking at the Google maps of the area, I can't see why they couldn't just build a normal bridge, the bridge that was proposed was enormous, and way too much for the need. Essentially, between the town and the airport is a river, just have the bridge on one side of the town, and push the huge ships to the other side of the island, or the other side of the river-like section to reach the town. The airport being served, according to Wikipedia, is the second largest in Alaska, so it would be worth the state's money/time to build the bridge, just not such a large one.
Turns out that the "bridge to nowhere" is actually a bridge being built to an airport that is on an island. There is no population there as people don't tend to live at the airport...at least not by choice. The fact that this made national news without the supporting facts on the bridge shows the smear campaign for what it was.
I had to read on to figure out why they down scored the Xoom on hardware when they have the same specs. It came down to price, which is comparing Apples to oranges as they are different sized screens. They even admitted that the cameras on the Xoom were actually better then the iPad, and the Xoom had more features at the same specs.
I would even say that the article is blatant Fanboism, The Xoom they say costs $800 when the comparable iPad costs $750? While they bash the Xoom for being heavier and thicker, they forget that the Xoom has a bigger screen (10.1 vs 9.7) so of course its going to be slightly larger and heavier...The processor and memory of these models is pretty much the same, but the Xoom has a USB and MicroSD slot that the iPad doesn't, to me, the Xoom is the clear winner. The negatives don't outweigh the positives unless you truly feel that they are the equivalent devices and then the iPad being aluminum somehow matters because it is prettier.
What about all the services that are still going to be counted towards the cap, but host servers on the ATT network to reduce the peering link load? All of the streaming providers do this, even Netflix, but they are still being counted in the cap.
Except that that is true of many other services as well. Netflix, Hulu, YouTube all attempt to get servers on ISP networks to reduce internet traffic, but these services will still count towards your cap, while the ATT services will not. Unfair practices anyone?
I don't think anyone in their right mind is concerned about realistic traffic shaping. I can't imagine anyone using Bittorrent that would mind their transfer being the lowest priority on the QoS list, and people using Skype would prefer the highest QoS (probably after the ATT TV service, which understandably should be pretty high) Bittorrent does not benefit from being a bandwidth hog, and anyone who is polite caps the bandwidth of their BT software. Putting a cap in place however is the wrong solution to congested pipes, if congested pipes are causing realtime services to have issues, then the people coding the QoS aren't doing their job.
Correction. I missread your post, I thought you were saying 10k a month. Please consider me now agreeing with you. I think the exact number is more like 1700 a month, which works out pretty close to 10k a year.
What about the existing customers who bought an advertised service of unlimited at xGb/sec connection? The advertising that caused them to sign up for the service is now false, and they haven't changed any of their service to receive a cap. If ATT has contracts for their DSL service, they are now in breach and you can drop the service.
Except with Verizon at least, you are locked into a 2 year contract. Not sure how ATT works, but Verizon would definitely freak out if I dropped them right now.
I like how on my (new) Droid, when I click that Verizon app, it shows 65MB/Unlimited. I wonder how long that will last though. I also find it funny that with Unlimited plans, it shows it as if you have used it all up, not as if it is infinite:)
Your number is pretty low actually. You might be able to get a fractional T1 at $199, but not even a full T1 is that cheap, let alone 4 of them.
But, all ISPs except ComCrap are having no bandwidth issues except during peak hours, this is not an attempt to reduce the peering bandwidth, this is an attempt to recover their TV service which has been dying since Netflix, YouTube, Hulu etc came out. Haven't you noticed that BlockBuster has pretty much closed down all their stores? They can't compete, and the cable TV providers are scared that they are next. This is why I get constant mail from Verizon that they want me on FiOS TV, even though I don't want it. TV is dying, internet is coming into its prime, and it scares the hell out of the media producers and the media delivery companies.
Netflix most definitely isn't overselling or everyone would get the low bitrate. I get pretty decent quality, not sure exact bitrate, but I can stream from the Wii, my computer and run multiple streams of other data over a 25/25 connection, so my bet would be that ATT is causing the low bitrate you are getting to try and degrade the Netflix service and make their own service look better to customers.
The man who delivered both my children had to leave the obstetrics practice due to the cost of insurance. Everyone wants to blame the doctor for everything that goes wrong with their precious little package. It couldn't possibly be that birth is a risky process, or that things can go wrong. People look at it as the doctor causes their problem, when most likely if the doctor hadn't intervened, the result would have been death instead. I see the commercials for the medical malpractice suits, and they always piss me off, this is what makes medical procedures expensive, that half the money goes towards the insurance from lawsuits. The Health insurers have made every effort to control costs as far as I have seen, but it is difficult to do as every procedure is essentially unique, no two heart surgeries are exactly the same, but I bet the insurance payout is a set amount.
Move somewhere with more people. You will have more selection if you don't live in the middle of a major city, but also don't live miles from your neighbor.
Along with ByOhTek, I don't live in the backwoods.
Verizon FiOS/DSL Comcast Cable Modem Many DSL providers A Few (802.11 style) wireless providers Cricket unlimited broadband cards Verizon 5gb/mo 4g wireless broadband ATT 2GB/mo 4g Sprint (unlimited?) Wimax T-Mobile (not sure of limits, never looked at it)
Move somewhere where your closest neighbor is 100 feet away and you might get decent options. I live in the suburbs of Baltimore MD, so there is even Metro Wireless in the inner harbor, but I am too far away to use it.
I wasn't saying you were attacking those items, but that you would be against them if you are against nuclear power plants. Cars, trains, oil and coal all have lead to more deaths since they were put in general use then nuclear reactors. Even in the worst case with these Japanese reactors, they won't lead to as many deaths as the tsunami/earthquake itself. Are we to outlaw earthquakes next?
I tend to agree with you about power savings, but forcing them on people by taxation will only hurt everyone and won't fix the problem. If you tax large vehicles, then what happens to those who have a real reason to have one? What would happen to our food shipments in that case? I drive a Toyota Camry, I am by no means a large consumer of fossil fuels, my car gets 29-32 MPG (real usage) and is the size it is because I need a car of that size with kids. As far as houses go, how would you go about only using climate control in some of the houses? I don't really need AC or heat in the kitchen, but how would you not heat or cool that room while keeping the rest of the rooms comfortable?
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe because you are making yourself out to be pretty dumb. 500 miles from the epicenter of the quake is still pretty damn close. The power went out, and the backup power failed, possibly because the backup generators were damaged by the quake or tsunami? Then eventually the batteries that are the backup to the backup ran out of juice, and the pumps shutdown. A modern design say from France, or elsewhere would have then immediately SCRAMed, unfortunately, these old designs don't do that. It is a poor design, that has been retired, and even in the worst case, the nuclear release is small and quickly decays.
That only works when you are posting from the US, as this is a US web site.
I wouldn't know what a Republican would understand, as I am more Libritarian leaning. But in general, people don't finance bridges of this magnatude. Frankly, looking at the Google maps of the area, I can't see why they couldn't just build a normal bridge, the bridge that was proposed was enormous, and way too much for the need. Essentially, between the town and the airport is a river, just have the bridge on one side of the town, and push the huge ships to the other side of the island, or the other side of the river-like section to reach the town. The airport being served, according to Wikipedia, is the second largest in Alaska, so it would be worth the state's money/time to build the bridge, just not such a large one.
I've never had issues with the browser, I assume it is chrome, but it isn't like it tells you :)
But having to root it for the market is annoying.
Turns out that the "bridge to nowhere" is actually a bridge being built to an airport that is on an island. There is no population there as people don't tend to live at the airport...at least not by choice. The fact that this made national news without the supporting facts on the bridge shows the smear campaign for what it was.
Read the post that shows below this, I retracted when I realized you said year, not month.
Decent wifi only Android eh? Check out the Nook Color. $250 and pretty small.
I had to read on to figure out why they down scored the Xoom on hardware when they have the same specs. It came down to price, which is comparing Apples to oranges as they are different sized screens. They even admitted that the cameras on the Xoom were actually better then the iPad, and the Xoom had more features at the same specs.
I would even say that the article is blatant Fanboism, The Xoom they say costs $800 when the comparable iPad costs $750? While they bash the Xoom for being heavier and thicker, they forget that the Xoom has a bigger screen (10.1 vs 9.7) so of course its going to be slightly larger and heavier...The processor and memory of these models is pretty much the same, but the Xoom has a USB and MicroSD slot that the iPad doesn't, to me, the Xoom is the clear winner. The negatives don't outweigh the positives unless you truly feel that they are the equivalent devices and then the iPad being aluminum somehow matters because it is prettier.
Netflix is a CDN, they are currently on Akamai, and I would be very surprised if ATT didn't have Akamai servers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_delivery_network
http://blog.streamingmedia.com/the_business_of_online_vi/2010/03/akamai-now-the-primary-cdn-for-netflix-but-at-a-very-low-price.html
Therefore, no, they don't increase traffic over the peering links.
What about all the services that are still going to be counted towards the cap, but host servers on the ATT network to reduce the peering link load? All of the streaming providers do this, even Netflix, but they are still being counted in the cap.
Except that that is true of many other services as well. Netflix, Hulu, YouTube all attempt to get servers on ISP networks to reduce internet traffic, but these services will still count towards your cap, while the ATT services will not. Unfair practices anyone?
I don't think anyone in their right mind is concerned about realistic traffic shaping. I can't imagine anyone using Bittorrent that would mind their transfer being the lowest priority on the QoS list, and people using Skype would prefer the highest QoS (probably after the ATT TV service, which understandably should be pretty high) Bittorrent does not benefit from being a bandwidth hog, and anyone who is polite caps the bandwidth of their BT software. Putting a cap in place however is the wrong solution to congested pipes, if congested pipes are causing realtime services to have issues, then the people coding the QoS aren't doing their job.
Correction. I missread your post, I thought you were saying 10k a month. Please consider me now agreeing with you. I think the exact number is more like 1700 a month, which works out pretty close to 10k a year.
DS3 service costs around $2k/mo, try again. That is 45 Mbit/sec continuous connection.
What about the existing customers who bought an advertised service of unlimited at xGb/sec connection? The advertising that caused them to sign up for the service is now false, and they haven't changed any of their service to receive a cap. If ATT has contracts for their DSL service, they are now in breach and you can drop the service.
Except with Verizon at least, you are locked into a 2 year contract. Not sure how ATT works, but Verizon would definitely freak out if I dropped them right now.
I like how on my (new) Droid, when I click that Verizon app, it shows 65MB/Unlimited. I wonder how long that will last though. I also find it funny that with Unlimited plans, it shows it as if you have used it all up, not as if it is infinite :)
Your number is pretty low actually. You might be able to get a fractional T1 at $199, but not even a full T1 is that cheap, let alone 4 of them.
But, all ISPs except ComCrap are having no bandwidth issues except during peak hours, this is not an attempt to reduce the peering bandwidth, this is an attempt to recover their TV service which has been dying since Netflix, YouTube, Hulu etc came out. Haven't you noticed that BlockBuster has pretty much closed down all their stores? They can't compete, and the cable TV providers are scared that they are next. This is why I get constant mail from Verizon that they want me on FiOS TV, even though I don't want it. TV is dying, internet is coming into its prime, and it scares the hell out of the media producers and the media delivery companies.
Netflix most definitely isn't overselling or everyone would get the low bitrate. I get pretty decent quality, not sure exact bitrate, but I can stream from the Wii, my computer and run multiple streams of other data over a 25/25 connection, so my bet would be that ATT is causing the low bitrate you are getting to try and degrade the Netflix service and make their own service look better to customers.
The man who delivered both my children had to leave the obstetrics practice due to the cost of insurance. Everyone wants to blame the doctor for everything that goes wrong with their precious little package. It couldn't possibly be that birth is a risky process, or that things can go wrong. People look at it as the doctor causes their problem, when most likely if the doctor hadn't intervened, the result would have been death instead. I see the commercials for the medical malpractice suits, and they always piss me off, this is what makes medical procedures expensive, that half the money goes towards the insurance from lawsuits. The Health insurers have made every effort to control costs as far as I have seen, but it is difficult to do as every procedure is essentially unique, no two heart surgeries are exactly the same, but I bet the insurance payout is a set amount.
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2036424&cid=35491232
Move somewhere with more people. You will have more selection if you don't live in the middle of a major city, but also don't live miles from your neighbor.
Along with ByOhTek, I don't live in the backwoods.
Verizon FiOS/DSL
Comcast Cable Modem
Many DSL providers
A Few (802.11 style) wireless providers
Cricket unlimited broadband cards
Verizon 5gb/mo 4g wireless broadband
ATT 2GB/mo 4g
Sprint (unlimited?) Wimax
T-Mobile (not sure of limits, never looked at it)
Move somewhere where your closest neighbor is 100 feet away and you might get decent options. I live in the suburbs of Baltimore MD, so there is even Metro Wireless in the inner harbor, but I am too far away to use it.
I wasn't saying you were attacking those items, but that you would be against them if you are against nuclear power plants. Cars, trains, oil and coal all have lead to more deaths since they were put in general use then nuclear reactors. Even in the worst case with these Japanese reactors, they won't lead to as many deaths as the tsunami/earthquake itself. Are we to outlaw earthquakes next?
I tend to agree with you about power savings, but forcing them on people by taxation will only hurt everyone and won't fix the problem. If you tax large vehicles, then what happens to those who have a real reason to have one? What would happen to our food shipments in that case? I drive a Toyota Camry, I am by no means a large consumer of fossil fuels, my car gets 29-32 MPG (real usage) and is the size it is because I need a car of that size with kids. As far as houses go, how would you go about only using climate control in some of the houses? I don't really need AC or heat in the kitchen, but how would you not heat or cool that room while keeping the rest of the rooms comfortable?
Primarily because the people and orgs that are against them won't let them be replaced with newer and safer designs.
There, FTFY. If it wasn't for NIMBYs like you, those reactors would have been bulldozed 10 years ago.