Last week, The A.P. took an unusually strict position against quotation of its work, sending a letter to the Drudge Retort asking it to remove seven items that contained quotations from A.P. articles ranging from 39 to 79 words.
On Saturday, The A.P. retreated. Jim Kennedy, vice president and strategy director of The A.P., said in an interview that the news organization had decided that its letter to the Drudge Retort was "heavy-handed" and that The A.P. was going to rethink its policies toward bloggers.
The quick about-face came, he said, because a number of well-known bloggers started criticizing its policy, claiming it would undercut the active discussion of the news that rages on sites, big and small, across the Internet [...]
But the AP still doesn't really get it (if it can get away with destroying it, where "it" is "fair use"):
Still, Mr. Kennedy said that the organization has not withdrawn its request that Drudge Retort remove the seven items. And he said that he still believes that it is more appropriate for blogs to use short summaries of A.P. articles rather than direct quotations, even short ones.
"Cutting and pasting a lot of content into a blog is not what we want to see," he said. "It is more consistent with the spirit of the Internet to link to content so people can read the whole thing in context."
Instead of Congress yanking the FBI off of un-Constitutional privacy violations and other worthless, expensive investigations, in favor of protecting us from software attacks, Congress is abdicating yet more responsibility for protecting us, in favor of giving legal cover for unaccountable vigilantes.
What do we pay those people to do, anyway? Ruin us? We can get that for free.
I know about the case already. The civilized world rejoiced that the US had returned to the rule of law, after the suspension of Habeas Corpus was finally ended (not that Bush will respect the ruling, but at least his violations are unquestionably criminal now). You are whining that the US is ruled by Habeas Corpus and the Constitution. While crowing that the president is above the law, and can just illegally delete official records without laws even having jurisdiction over them.
Let me make this short, because your reading isn't connected to any kind of processing. You're a nazi. I don't care what else you say, because it's all just nazi talk. Go tell some other nazi, who might care, or pretend to. You nazis always take each other out when you run out of easy victims, anyway.
Do they have to throttle P2P to control bandwidth usage, or are they just rolling out the same kind of propaganda as American network operators? After all, Sony owns a lot of content.
The engineers have to implement technology that supports the activity that people want to do. That the market demands. Their design decisions are constrained by their bosses, who are prioritizing competing with other sources of content over any kind of service quality to their customers. You're talking about these engineers as if they're actually being charged with keeping the networks clear, rather than build out a strategy that constrains bandwidth to enhance the perception of scarcity, which is the basis of the value that the network operators are selling.
Yes, people's bandwidth demands will expand to fill whatever capacity is delivered. But networks sell that bandwidth. The problem is that WAN operators have long counted on an optimization, bandwidth oversubscription, that sells people what they could never all actually get. That era has passed. Network operators have to expand the capacity of the shared links to accommodate the capacity of the edges. When they do that, get the proportions correct to the modern demand models, they will have a hugely valuable product to sell, that will earn them a lot more money as it helps others make a lot more money, either off the delivery of content or just elsewhere in order to consume that content.
But they're so used to getting everything, and giving the least possible, that they're just doing more of that, with their new monopoly powers. They want to sell content in competition with their content delivering customers, and of course (because they always have) they want to use their competitive advantages to crush those customers who are competitors. Even if that means also stepping all over the demands of their customers who are consumers.
That's why the telcos and cablecos create the false dichotomy. They're the ones who are saying they must deploy tiered pricing and bandwidth caps, even though their own research shows that increased bandwidth is cheaper and more effective at solving the problem, while bringing extra benefits (more bandwidth overall to sell).
A content-neutral network is a primary benefit of the Internet. Keeping that value as a design goal is necessarily the job of the government, because the telcos/cablecos are ignoring the economics of the basic problem in favor of a more complex strategic goal. A goal that puts the telcos/cablecos' interests in conflict with their customers at both ends of a transmission.
I think that the current means of Network Neutrality enforcement is in fact wrong, because it focuses on the wrong layer of the overall problem. If Internet bandwidth providers were prohibited from the kind of vertical bundling that defines other monopolistic industries, like say Microsoft's, then they'd all be falling over themselves to build more bandwidth, more product to sell. If they were also required to continue the "common carriage" policies that everyone knows is essential to essential infrastructure, that combination would give us a level playing field that would include content neutrality, and a lot of the rest of what makes the Internet healthy.
But instead, the cablecos/telcos are running the legislation with their lobbyists, finding a conflict only with a few content providers rich enough to stand up, newcomers like Google. Consumers are totally absent, except that the content providers prioritize them (because they're more sensitive to market demands than are telcos/cablecos, because they're not monopolies who can ignore their customers). That's a tragedy, because of course Congress is supposed to represent those consumers first, as their population is vastly greater than the number of executives at the cablecos/telcos and content providers combined.
So in the meantime, at least Network Neutrality protects part of consumers' interests. Since economics (at least the basic, sus
I already have many times, and again just now. Clinton's brand of "bipartisanship" was called "triangulation". Which included all kinds of gifts to fascists, like some of his other "bipartisan" appointments, like Republican Defense Secretary William Cohen, who created the Pentagon that drove us into Iraq once they had all the points of the triangle covered with Republican control.
"More rights than the Nazis"? You're a fascist too. Er, I mean "Republican". Oh, right, 2008 - that's "libertarian", check.
If you weren't a fascist, lying to make Nazis look like victims, you'd know that that's a bullshit lie.
But hey, you're really not sticking up for Nazis. You're really just defending the kidnapping and secret torture of "accused terrorists", denying them protection of their Habeas Corpus rights that the Constitution requires.
How "libertarian" of you.
Conversely, when the courts do their job defending the Constitution and our rights, I applaud them. When they give you the unaccountable dictator you prefer, I loudly boo. Them and you.
No, she's a fascist. Fascists are people who support corporate rule of the people through force by a nationalistic government under a personality cult dictator (we call it a "Unitary Executive"). Since corporate rule, rather than by the people, cannot rely on the people's cooperation, it comes with all kinds of familiar coercion and propaganda. Scapegoating minorities, keeping them in concentration camps. Manufactured foreign threats trumped up into war. All for the profit and power of the ruling corporations.
Sound familiar? It's fascism.
Kollar-Kotelly has a record of ruling in favor of exactly that kind of fascism in the US, including this latest travesty. She's no small town planning board member. She's a big shot, with a trail of wreckage all over her resume.
Don't be afraid to call them fascists when they are fascists. There was nothing magic about the 1930s-40s fascists, or our ancestors who fought them under that name. Except that they were willing to do it, and they won. Except they took their eye off the ball in Spain with Franco, and his fascism lasted decades, setting back Spain by a century. We don't have that luxury.
She's a fascist, and she just set us back. Back to a fascist era, but this time we're the fascists. Though I'm not. I'm more like a terrorist - though Americans call my kind a "freedom fighter".
I am. Almost as mad as I am for his appointing Republican senator William Cohen as his Defense Secretary (1997-2001), who dismissed Wesley Clark from commanding NATO (apparently for winning the Kosovo War without any US casualties). Which gave us the Pentagon that backed Bush every step of the way lying us into the Iraq War, while letting Binladen go (despite Clinton forcing Cohen's Pentagon to bomb Binladen's bases).
Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who just created this official, binding policy that the government is above the law, is a fascist judge. She might be familiar to Slashdotters as the judge who the incoming Bush "Justice" Department got to run the Microsoft monopoly verdict's appeal and toothless "remedy phase.
You might not know that Kollar-Kotelly ruled in the execution trial of Saddam Hussein that "the United States has no right to interfere with the judicial processes of another nation's courts", when such interference might mean Hussein might live to tell more of what he knows about US interference in Iraq, or rather its lengthy cooperation with his murderous regime.
And you might not realize that Kollar-Kotelly is the presiding judge of the Bush-packed FISA Court, that has rubberstamped Bush's regime's tens of thousands of "exceptional" wiretap requests that violate the 4th Amendment (which artificial loophole is the entire purpose of that court). Which is why today's Congressional Republicans are doing everything they can to put telco amnesty for violating FISA under the FISA Court's jurisdiction, instead of a regular court that actually obeys the Constitution.
Kollar-Kotelly is the go-to judge for Unitary Executive fantasy privileges, whenever they can squeak some out. After all, she kicked off her legal career as a lawyer for Nixon's "Justice" Department.
Finally some visualizations of the Net (or bits of it) starting to be worthy of the descriptions William Gibson's http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/William_Gibson#Neuromancer_.281984.29_Neuromancer_ gave it in 1984:
Cyberspace. A consensual hallucination experienced daily by billions of legitimate operators, in every nation, by children being taught mathematical concepts... A graphic representation of data abstracted from banks of every computer in the human system. Unthinkable complexity. Lines of light ranged in the nonspace of the mind, clusters and constellations of data. Like city lights, receding...
Now if someone could make those visualizations interactive GUIs to archives and people, we might finally be getting somewhere. Someone wake me when we're in Stephenson's Metaverse, the home version of the game.
"Tip of the iceberg"? We found icebergs on a trio of extraterrestrial Super-Earths? That means water! That means life! That means green super-women, out there for the asking, who haven't heard how weird it is to have a space nerd boyfriend!
There's all kinds of places, including the gastrointestinal tract, where there are temp gradients.
At these scales, the differential required could be extremely small. Perhaps smaller than the difference as heat diffuses across those membranes that contact cooler (or, rarely, warmer) temperatures.
I consult for the NYC City Council's Technology committee. We ran "Net Neutrality" hearings as a matter of official NYC public policy, as NYC operates a lot of networks, and has a lot of influence over Verizon both here in NYC and nationwide (and around the world), as well as all the other telcos and other networks of every kind.
I interviewed several academic computer scientists (like a PhD CS professor at Columbia University) who have been paid by telcos themselves to research congestion issues. Specifically whether it's more economical to tier services by content (or anything else), or to just build more bandwidth that's content-neutral (and protocol neutral, so email and P2P are the same priority as realtime TV and phone). They compared the economics of the buildout and the management, as well as actually building test labs of each.
They officially reported to the telcos that unequivocally building more bandwidth was better *** FOR THE TELCOS ***.
The telcos know that it's better. They're just lying because they want an excuse to spy on your messages for political purposes (like their FISA violations, which wouldn't look as bad anymore), and to compete with some content of their own (like voice and video). That "technical reality" is a pack of lies, except where it admits that more bandwidth is better for everyone. Everyone, that is, except the execs at telcos hellbent on world domination.
300pW is 7.17017208E-11 calories per second, or 6.19502868 millionths of a calorie per day. Over 160,000 of these sensors could be powered on a single calorie a day. Adults eat about 2500-3000 calories a day or more.
If these devices can be powered by a nanoscale heat engine, they could live indefinitely, as long as their host human is alive to measure.
I think you're right, but it's not to save the small amount of money on bandwidth and storage of alt.*. It was part of Verizon's overall program of interdicting content traversing its network based on arbitrary rules that have no direct economic argument, but which create the context for Verizon blocking content with which Verizon competes. It might be mostly picture and porn binaries, but that's close enough to movies. The thin edge of the wedge: "kiddie porn" has be be searched and identified in Verizon packets, so they can ID everything else once their Federal requirement not to pry into data's content is thrown away.
Those posts of child pornography on Usenet are traceable evidence of crimes exploiting children. The state AGs should be tracing the evidence back to the criminal exploiters and busting them. Instead, they're driving it underground, where it's harder to stop. First use the evidence to find and bust the perps, then remove the evidence from the public where it does further harm. Or the perps will just disappear, then pop up again creating more harm to more kids.
This foolish shortsightedness isn't just prosecutors and cops misunderstanding the newfangled Internet. This is cops and prosecutors failing to understand how free expression is always a benefit, when you understand it enough to use it right. That's a lesson at least 200 years in the making. It's about time Americans forced our "justice" system to get smart about it.
Oh, so it's all true, except the part about the people actually doing it being to blame.
What do you think a "conspiracy" actually is? Do you think it has to be some kind of smokefilled secret room, filled with guys with eyepatches? Or just the ongoing discussions among a group of judges of how to defy the Constitution (like where it requires letting Florida determine its own Electoral Votes according to its own state legislature and courts, or where it unequivocally prohibits Congress suspending Habeas Corpus without rebellion or invasion).
The Constitutional crisis in America has become undeniable, because it's destroying America, now in advanced stages. But it seems there's still some denial left to go around, especially when assigning personal responsibility for the specific acts that are destroying us. When those people, whose offices deserve respect when faithfully executed, violate their offices repeatedly, consistently, and in coordinated discussion with each other, those destructive acts so betray our expectations of them that little respect is due, except the honest and accurate assessment of their guilt.
That is what I delivered. 20% of mods think that's "trolling". Even if they disagree, they don't bother to do so. They just anonymously try to suppress the point they don't like. Because they're guilty, too, having voted for the larger group of guilty people carrying out the destruction, who were installed by the smaller group of guilty people I pointed out. That's not trolling. But modding it as such is trollModding.
Thanks for the thorough answer. The mobos in the list to which you linked mostly didn't list their SATA ports in their "front page" entries, except a few that were more expensive.
I'm thinking about going your way. How does it compare with a cheap mobo with some SuperMicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 cards in it?
No, not all Americans have that access. What makes you say that? Have you ever tried to get a meeting with your senator? When IBM, or just the Coca-Cola bottling plant, wants a meeting, they get one that month, if not that day. If some mere constituent wants one, they can wait months, if they get one at all. Some states with very low populations (in their ratio to their 2 senators, or even in their ratio to their reps, which also vary by almost 100%) do have more easy access. But most states, the ones with Congressmembers with power, don't let just anyone from the public talk to them.
I have worked with national, provincial/state, municipal and county governments for over a decade. I'm talking from experience. What are you talking from?
Aren't you just talking from some purely theoretical, probably "libertarian", perspective? You libertarians like to say that everyone's equally free to make a lot more money than everyone else, and then buy more influence, so it's fair. Maybe in SimCity, but in the real world, there are enormous disparities between people's opportunities, that is the amorphous but still binding social reality we call "class". Do you really think that George Bush Jr got his political influence because of his hard work and talent, or because of his class? Do you really think that he's at all unique, or rather that he's the general rule?
On the Internet, "libertarians" are free to talk like you've got some evidence. But what you've got is the plot from an Ayn Rand novel. They haven't even made that kind of fiction into a videogame yet, but you're trying to live in it. The rest of us don't.
Yeah, Apple was working on OpenDoc when I worked for Apple in 1993-94. But they spun that off into a joint venture with IBM called Taligent, where it died.
Apple should bring it back. Some of my ideas were what we were talking about at Apple back then, while we were switching the Toolkit from Pascal to C++, and rolling out Quicktime, and it looked like we were staring in the face of a huge, unlimited new age. But instead, Taligent went down with a thud, Apple started losing lots of money, and those object oriented freedoms never redefined the OS.
But by comparison, what Microsoft was offering at the time was "OLEDB", a message-oriented relational filesystem, that it's still never delivered, and still lies about to keep people excited about the future every time it offers a new OS.
I'd bet that someone, maybe even Apple, delivers my kind of environment before MS ever delivers a relational filesystem usable instead of flat files.
That's true, but it was never any different in the US. Except maybe on TV for a while, and in the movies.
But for that matter, it's even less true in other countries. Plus, it's also truer in individual US states than in the country as a whole. Which is what you have to compare most other countries to, where the US states are vastly more democratic and accessible than European, Asian, Latin American, African or other countries. The US is also vastly more Democratic that the EU as a whole, especially in terms of access, or any other comparable entity, like the CIS (Russia), or Japan or anywhere else.
Nowhere is a shining example of democracy and freedom. The US has its problems, some worse than other countries. But let's not pretend that the US is at all alone in them, or that anywhere is really that beacon. In fact, it doesn't really seem like democracy and freedom shine - they're inherently grubby, like the people ourselves.
I'm not trying to boot off the SATA drive. I'm booting off the mobo's IDE. But with the SATA card in the PCI, the machine doesn't even finish the POST before freezing, even if I don't have a SATA drive connected.
Slashdot Mirror
But the AP still doesn't really get it (if it can get away with destroying it, where "it" is "fair use"):
Instead of Congress yanking the FBI off of un-Constitutional privacy violations and other worthless, expensive investigations, in favor of protecting us from software attacks, Congress is abdicating yet more responsibility for protecting us, in favor of giving legal cover for unaccountable vigilantes.
What do we pay those people to do, anyway? Ruin us? We can get that for free.
I know about the case already. The civilized world rejoiced that the US had returned to the rule of law, after the suspension of Habeas Corpus was finally ended (not that Bush will respect the ruling, but at least his violations are unquestionably criminal now). You are whining that the US is ruled by Habeas Corpus and the Constitution. While crowing that the president is above the law, and can just illegally delete official records without laws even having jurisdiction over them.
Let me make this short, because your reading isn't connected to any kind of processing. You're a nazi. I don't care what else you say, because it's all just nazi talk. Go tell some other nazi, who might care, or pretend to. You nazis always take each other out when you run out of easy victims, anyway.
Do they have to throttle P2P to control bandwidth usage, or are they just rolling out the same kind of propaganda as American network operators? After all, Sony owns a lot of content.
The engineers have to implement technology that supports the activity that people want to do. That the market demands. Their design decisions are constrained by their bosses, who are prioritizing competing with other sources of content over any kind of service quality to their customers. You're talking about these engineers as if they're actually being charged with keeping the networks clear, rather than build out a strategy that constrains bandwidth to enhance the perception of scarcity, which is the basis of the value that the network operators are selling.
Yes, people's bandwidth demands will expand to fill whatever capacity is delivered. But networks sell that bandwidth. The problem is that WAN operators have long counted on an optimization, bandwidth oversubscription, that sells people what they could never all actually get. That era has passed. Network operators have to expand the capacity of the shared links to accommodate the capacity of the edges. When they do that, get the proportions correct to the modern demand models, they will have a hugely valuable product to sell, that will earn them a lot more money as it helps others make a lot more money, either off the delivery of content or just elsewhere in order to consume that content.
But they're so used to getting everything, and giving the least possible, that they're just doing more of that, with their new monopoly powers. They want to sell content in competition with their content delivering customers, and of course (because they always have) they want to use their competitive advantages to crush those customers who are competitors. Even if that means also stepping all over the demands of their customers who are consumers.
That's why the telcos and cablecos create the false dichotomy. They're the ones who are saying they must deploy tiered pricing and bandwidth caps, even though their own research shows that increased bandwidth is cheaper and more effective at solving the problem, while bringing extra benefits (more bandwidth overall to sell).
A content-neutral network is a primary benefit of the Internet. Keeping that value as a design goal is necessarily the job of the government, because the telcos/cablecos are ignoring the economics of the basic problem in favor of a more complex strategic goal. A goal that puts the telcos/cablecos' interests in conflict with their customers at both ends of a transmission.
I think that the current means of Network Neutrality enforcement is in fact wrong, because it focuses on the wrong layer of the overall problem. If Internet bandwidth providers were prohibited from the kind of vertical bundling that defines other monopolistic industries, like say Microsoft's, then they'd all be falling over themselves to build more bandwidth, more product to sell. If they were also required to continue the "common carriage" policies that everyone knows is essential to essential infrastructure, that combination would give us a level playing field that would include content neutrality, and a lot of the rest of what makes the Internet healthy.
But instead, the cablecos/telcos are running the legislation with their lobbyists, finding a conflict only with a few content providers rich enough to stand up, newcomers like Google. Consumers are totally absent, except that the content providers prioritize them (because they're more sensitive to market demands than are telcos/cablecos, because they're not monopolies who can ignore their customers). That's a tragedy, because of course Congress is supposed to represent those consumers first, as their population is vastly greater than the number of executives at the cablecos/telcos and content providers combined.
So in the meantime, at least Network Neutrality protects part of consumers' interests. Since economics (at least the basic, sus
I already have many times, and again just now. Clinton's brand of "bipartisanship" was called "triangulation". Which included all kinds of gifts to fascists, like some of his other "bipartisan" appointments, like Republican Defense Secretary William Cohen, who created the Pentagon that drove us into Iraq once they had all the points of the triangle covered with Republican control.
"More rights than the Nazis"? You're a fascist too. Er, I mean "Republican". Oh, right, 2008 - that's "libertarian", check.
If you weren't a fascist, lying to make Nazis look like victims, you'd know that that's a bullshit lie.
But hey, you're really not sticking up for Nazis. You're really just defending the kidnapping and secret torture of "accused terrorists", denying them protection of their Habeas Corpus rights that the Constitution requires.
How "libertarian" of you.
Conversely, when the courts do their job defending the Constitution and our rights, I applaud them. When they give you the unaccountable dictator you prefer, I loudly boo. Them and you.
Because fascism isn't totally unopposed in this country. "Pimpin' ain't easy."
No, she's a fascist. Fascists are people who support corporate rule of the people through force by a nationalistic government under a personality cult dictator (we call it a "Unitary Executive"). Since corporate rule, rather than by the people, cannot rely on the people's cooperation, it comes with all kinds of familiar coercion and propaganda. Scapegoating minorities, keeping them in concentration camps. Manufactured foreign threats trumped up into war. All for the profit and power of the ruling corporations.
Sound familiar? It's fascism.
Kollar-Kotelly has a record of ruling in favor of exactly that kind of fascism in the US, including this latest travesty. She's no small town planning board member. She's a big shot, with a trail of wreckage all over her resume.
Don't be afraid to call them fascists when they are fascists. There was nothing magic about the 1930s-40s fascists, or our ancestors who fought them under that name. Except that they were willing to do it, and they won. Except they took their eye off the ball in Spain with Franco, and his fascism lasted decades, setting back Spain by a century. We don't have that luxury.
She's a fascist, and she just set us back. Back to a fascist era, but this time we're the fascists. Though I'm not. I'm more like a terrorist - though Americans call my kind a "freedom fighter".
I am. Almost as mad as I am for his appointing Republican senator William Cohen as his Defense Secretary (1997-2001), who dismissed Wesley Clark from commanding NATO (apparently for winning the Kosovo War without any US casualties). Which gave us the Pentagon that backed Bush every step of the way lying us into the Iraq War, while letting Binladen go (despite Clinton forcing Cohen's Pentagon to bomb Binladen's bases).
Aren't you mad about all that too?
Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who just created this official, binding policy that the government is above the law, is a fascist judge. She might be familiar to Slashdotters as the judge who the incoming Bush "Justice" Department got to run the Microsoft monopoly verdict's appeal and toothless "remedy phase.
You might not know that Kollar-Kotelly ruled in the execution trial of Saddam Hussein that "the United States has no right to interfere with the judicial processes of another nation's courts", when such interference might mean Hussein might live to tell more of what he knows about US interference in Iraq, or rather its lengthy cooperation with his murderous regime.
And you might not realize that Kollar-Kotelly is the presiding judge of the Bush-packed FISA Court, that has rubberstamped Bush's regime's tens of thousands of "exceptional" wiretap requests that violate the 4th Amendment (which artificial loophole is the entire purpose of that court). Which is why today's Congressional Republicans are doing everything they can to put telco amnesty for violating FISA under the FISA Court's jurisdiction, instead of a regular court that actually obeys the Constitution.
Kollar-Kotelly is the go-to judge for Unitary Executive fantasy privileges, whenever they can squeak some out. After all, she kicked off her legal career as a lawyer for Nixon's "Justice" Department.
Play ball!
Now if someone could make those visualizations interactive GUIs to archives and people, we might finally be getting somewhere. Someone wake me when we're in Stephenson's Metaverse, the home version of the game.
"Tip of the iceberg"? We found icebergs on a trio of extraterrestrial Super-Earths? That means water! That means life! That means green super-women, out there for the asking, who haven't heard how weird it is to have a space nerd boyfriend!
There's all kinds of places, including the gastrointestinal tract, where there are temp gradients.
At these scales, the differential required could be extremely small. Perhaps smaller than the difference as heat diffuses across those membranes that contact cooler (or, rarely, warmer) temperatures.
True. Damn nutritionists use "calorie" and "kilocalorie" interchangeably. That really burns me up.
I consult for the NYC City Council's Technology committee. We ran "Net Neutrality" hearings as a matter of official NYC public policy, as NYC operates a lot of networks, and has a lot of influence over Verizon both here in NYC and nationwide (and around the world), as well as all the other telcos and other networks of every kind.
I interviewed several academic computer scientists (like a PhD CS professor at Columbia University) who have been paid by telcos themselves to research congestion issues. Specifically whether it's more economical to tier services by content (or anything else), or to just build more bandwidth that's content-neutral (and protocol neutral, so email and P2P are the same priority as realtime TV and phone). They compared the economics of the buildout and the management, as well as actually building test labs of each.
They officially reported to the telcos that unequivocally building more bandwidth was better *** FOR THE TELCOS *** .
The telcos know that it's better. They're just lying because they want an excuse to spy on your messages for political purposes (like their FISA violations, which wouldn't look as bad anymore), and to compete with some content of their own (like voice and video). That "technical reality" is a pack of lies, except where it admits that more bandwidth is better for everyone. Everyone, that is, except the execs at telcos hellbent on world domination.
300pW is 7.17017208E-11 calories per second, or 6.19502868 millionths of a calorie per day. Over 160,000 of these sensors could be powered on a single calorie a day. Adults eat about 2500-3000 calories a day or more.
If these devices can be powered by a nanoscale heat engine, they could live indefinitely, as long as their host human is alive to measure.
I think you're right, but it's not to save the small amount of money on bandwidth and storage of alt.*. It was part of Verizon's overall program of interdicting content traversing its network based on arbitrary rules that have no direct economic argument, but which create the context for Verizon blocking content with which Verizon competes. It might be mostly picture and porn binaries, but that's close enough to movies. The thin edge of the wedge: "kiddie porn" has be be searched and identified in Verizon packets, so they can ID everything else once their Federal requirement not to pry into data's content is thrown away.
Those posts of child pornography on Usenet are traceable evidence of crimes exploiting children. The state AGs should be tracing the evidence back to the criminal exploiters and busting them. Instead, they're driving it underground, where it's harder to stop. First use the evidence to find and bust the perps, then remove the evidence from the public where it does further harm. Or the perps will just disappear, then pop up again creating more harm to more kids.
This foolish shortsightedness isn't just prosecutors and cops misunderstanding the newfangled Internet. This is cops and prosecutors failing to understand how free expression is always a benefit, when you understand it enough to use it right. That's a lesson at least 200 years in the making. It's about time Americans forced our "justice" system to get smart about it.
Oh, so it's all true, except the part about the people actually doing it being to blame.
What do you think a "conspiracy" actually is? Do you think it has to be some kind of smokefilled secret room, filled with guys with eyepatches? Or just the ongoing discussions among a group of judges of how to defy the Constitution (like where it requires letting Florida determine its own Electoral Votes according to its own state legislature and courts, or where it unequivocally prohibits Congress suspending Habeas Corpus without rebellion or invasion).
The Constitutional crisis in America has become undeniable, because it's destroying America, now in advanced stages. But it seems there's still some denial left to go around, especially when assigning personal responsibility for the specific acts that are destroying us. When those people, whose offices deserve respect when faithfully executed, violate their offices repeatedly, consistently, and in coordinated discussion with each other, those destructive acts so betray our expectations of them that little respect is due, except the honest and accurate assessment of their guilt.
That is what I delivered. 20% of mods think that's "trolling". Even if they disagree, they don't bother to do so. They just anonymously try to suppress the point they don't like. Because they're guilty, too, having voted for the larger group of guilty people carrying out the destruction, who were installed by the smaller group of guilty people I pointed out. That's not trolling. But modding it as such is trollModding.
Sounds like a winner. But what do you think about this other suggestion, Gigabyte mobo based platform in comparison to yours?
Thanks for the thorough answer. The mobos in the list to which you linked mostly didn't list their SATA ports in their "front page" entries, except a few that were more expensive.
I'm thinking about going your way. How does it compare with a cheap mobo with some SuperMicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 cards in it?
No, not all Americans have that access. What makes you say that? Have you ever tried to get a meeting with your senator? When IBM, or just the Coca-Cola bottling plant, wants a meeting, they get one that month, if not that day. If some mere constituent wants one, they can wait months, if they get one at all. Some states with very low populations (in their ratio to their 2 senators, or even in their ratio to their reps, which also vary by almost 100%) do have more easy access. But most states, the ones with Congressmembers with power, don't let just anyone from the public talk to them.
I have worked with national, provincial/state, municipal and county governments for over a decade. I'm talking from experience. What are you talking from?
Aren't you just talking from some purely theoretical, probably "libertarian", perspective? You libertarians like to say that everyone's equally free to make a lot more money than everyone else, and then buy more influence, so it's fair. Maybe in SimCity, but in the real world, there are enormous disparities between people's opportunities, that is the amorphous but still binding social reality we call "class". Do you really think that George Bush Jr got his political influence because of his hard work and talent, or because of his class? Do you really think that he's at all unique, or rather that he's the general rule?
On the Internet, "libertarians" are free to talk like you've got some evidence. But what you've got is the plot from an Ayn Rand novel. They haven't even made that kind of fiction into a videogame yet, but you're trying to live in it. The rest of us don't.
Yeah, Apple was working on OpenDoc when I worked for Apple in 1993-94. But they spun that off into a joint venture with IBM called Taligent, where it died.
Apple should bring it back. Some of my ideas were what we were talking about at Apple back then, while we were switching the Toolkit from Pascal to C++, and rolling out Quicktime, and it looked like we were staring in the face of a huge, unlimited new age. But instead, Taligent went down with a thud, Apple started losing lots of money, and those object oriented freedoms never redefined the OS.
But by comparison, what Microsoft was offering at the time was "OLEDB", a message-oriented relational filesystem, that it's still never delivered, and still lies about to keep people excited about the future every time it offers a new OS.
I'd bet that someone, maybe even Apple, delivers my kind of environment before MS ever delivers a relational filesystem usable instead of flat files.
That's true, but it was never any different in the US. Except maybe on TV for a while, and in the movies.
But for that matter, it's even less true in other countries. Plus, it's also truer in individual US states than in the country as a whole. Which is what you have to compare most other countries to, where the US states are vastly more democratic and accessible than European, Asian, Latin American, African or other countries. The US is also vastly more Democratic that the EU as a whole, especially in terms of access, or any other comparable entity, like the CIS (Russia), or Japan or anywhere else.
Nowhere is a shining example of democracy and freedom. The US has its problems, some worse than other countries. But let's not pretend that the US is at all alone in them, or that anywhere is really that beacon. In fact, it doesn't really seem like democracy and freedom shine - they're inherently grubby, like the people ourselves.
I'm not trying to boot off the SATA drive. I'm booting off the mobo's IDE. But with the SATA card in the PCI, the machine doesn't even finish the POST before freezing, even if I don't have a SATA drive connected.