Verizon just upped all the 20mbit connections in my area to 25mbit for free. They've certainly got the back-end to cover it, since it's easy to get 2.8 or so MBps downloads. The upstream is 5Mbps. 25mbps is the entry level cheapest connection, you can pay slightly more to get 50mbps.
Good luck with that 20mbps down when you've only got 768k up. You need to ACK, after all.
Since there are still plenty of Gigabit Token Ring networks in existence, prediction of LANs demise should come from somebody who doesn't think Token Ring is dead for it to be credible.
10 years after the last RS232->Dumb terminal network is retired, *maybe* we'll see the retirement of the last 10base-T Ethernet LAN. Maybe. Entrenched technology doesn't die, no matter how much you wish it would.
One pirated CD copy is worth more than a human life!
An above-average wrongful death compensation award for a healthy working parent would be in the $1-3 million dollar range. You could go murder somebody. It'd be cheaper than pirating a few CDs. And if the CDs had DRM, the jail sentence would be shorter for the murder too! The US military pays out $600 for wrongful deaths in Iraq. A pirated CD copy is worth more than 2500 Iraqis!
In reality though, they're probably asking for so much in hopes that the compromise amount will be high. Hopefully congress tells them to fuck off instead of coming up with a "compromise" that is right in line with what they were really hoping for anyway.
I'm curious as to when your audit was. The one I describe was in 1999. They may have changed practices since... Or you might have gotten lucky... Or somebody higher up on the chain from you might have greased some palms...
And it's not a matter of "agreeing." It happened exactly as I described.
For the conspiracy theorists out there, I'd like to add that the servers at said company ran Linux, even though the workstations were NT.
Docsis 3.0 can't even come close unless your cable company is running their lines point-to-point (they aren't). Remember that the bandwidth is shared amongst yourself and your neighbors. They can't give you the whole pipe.
Look at how fast Docsis 2.0 is (42Mbps), and how little of that they can sell you... And even then they're over provisioning. So Docsis 3.0 is 4x faster... That means maybe they can up your cable modem spped by 4x? So your 7Mbps connection becomes 28? Fios is already at 50Mbps and they've got room to go up from there. The cable companies are essentially screwed in every market where they have to compete with FTTP.
B) most of the people they get actually had licenses but have no clue how to fulfill the strict audit requirements. No the stickers on the back of your machine are not enough. You must have a purchase agreement for _everything_
Keeping certificates is not enough. I worked for a company that got audited once. It was a small business, but run by a pair of lawyers who were sticklers for details. They shredded old paperwork after some number of years, and they got nailed because they had the certificates that came with NT 4.0, but not the receipts.
I honestly believe you could do everything by the book, and they'd still find something to nail you for... Not to mention that the audit costs your business in both time and money.
So.. the cost, to the providers, of delivering 50 billion text messages in the United Kingdom is $98? I'm not buying it.
You're right. The number is way off. Delivering 50 billion text messages in the UK saves them millions of dollars. Yes, that's right.
SMS users didn't pick up the phone and send 100x more data per second to get their message across. A cell user that texts heavily instead of making phone calls doesn't use up as much capacity in the cell as somebody on a voice call. The provider doesn't need to build as many towers, or expand their network nearly as quickly since many of their new customers text instead of calling. SMS traffic uses such a tiny percentage of the networks capacity that it's practically non-existent compared to voice traffic.
Cell companies turn a profit on their voice and data traffic, which is orders of magnitudes more expensive to provide. You can even load up your phone's browser and use an SMS gateway, and they're still turning a profit on you. SMS charges are ridiculously high from a gross margin perspective.
Free speech already doesn't cover inciting panic, so if 100 people ran around shouting "Anthrax" causing a panic they would be arrested. Rightfully so IMHO.
Free speech *does* cover such things, though. You won't be thrown in jail for what you said. You'll be thrown in jail for the outcome of what you said. If you yell "Fire" in a crowded theater, and mass hysteria doesn't ensue, you would almost certainly win a case on constitutional grounds should somebody try to prosecute you.
Free speech doesn't mean that you are free from taking responsibility for your actions. If your actions cause mass panic and civil unrest, you're going to face the consequences, regardless of whether those actions were merely "exercising your right to free speech" or not.
Back on topic though.... Having a home geiger counter is a fantastic idea if you want to be sure you aren't exposed to Radon.
For a long time our energy source was our own muscles
You have demonstrated a lack of understanding of the concept of "energy". You have failed the entrance criteria for participation in an educated discussion of the concepts involved in this thread. It would be pointless at this juncture to bother rebutting the rest of the assertions in your post. Please turn in your login and password on the way out.
That's because the odds of it killing somebody are almost astronomically lower than the odds of it landing in the middle of nowhere, but reachable by somebody who we'd rather didn't find it.
Chances are it's going to land in the ocean. Chances are that if it doesn't land in the ocean it's going to hit unoccupied land.
Causing an international incident really is the biggest worry here. Worrying about somebody getting killed by this thing is equivalent to worrying that somebody who lives on a back-road in the sticks is going to have an 18-wheeler drive off the road and hit their living room... Except that the truck accident scenario is actually more likely.
Those numbers don't even pass the laugh test. I don't understand why anybody who wants to have a shred of credibility would have published them. Anybody who has used more than one of those languages knows that 100:1 for Python or PHP compared to C++ is *bullshit*, as is even 1.5:1 for Java. You may be able to find some corner case where some specific operation make the statement true, but the article conveniently neglects to mention what they are testing to get those numbers.
Yes. Interpreted languages are slower than compiled languages. But you say "Sorry" like you're implying I was arguing otherwise. What I was arguing was two things: that when you are working under development time constraints, it is often easy to write a *much* faster application in a feature rich interpreted language than you can in the same amount of time in a less featured language, and that proper selection of algorithm with an eye towards computational complexity can be dozens of orders of magnitude more important than what language you select.
The article you reference is especially ironic, since it does a fantastic job of pointing out the shortcomings of the application framework (Rails in that case), and then confuses the language with the framework in his argument and unreferenced "data". In other words, he was keen to start a holy war, but he doesn't understand basic concepts. I guess he thinks he has some credibility because he's from Berkeley, and that we won't notice his bias by clicking though to his company's website which claims they "[use] the latest Microsoft technology to redefine the human/computer interface". Easy to pick the right tool for the job when the job is defined by the tool...
The month of December someone equals "the entire time"?
No, the "entire time" means since BluRay was released and caught up to HD-DVD (which came out first) after just two weeks. The entire time means the *entire time*. And those numbers come from Nielson/VideoScan, not "Home Media Magazine".
Not to mention that the PS3's marketshare of consoles is what...10%?
Closer to 20%, actually. Compared to 33% or so for the 360. And only if you don't count the PS2, in which case the two are statistically equivalent. Given your 1% argument, I think you'd see the merit of still including the best selling console on the market...
The question is, can BluRay's win cause the PS3 to make up its mere 6 million unit gap?
Reports are that sales have been absolutely massive, and Toshiba's campaign has been a success. Warner since has extended their HD-DVD support by almost a month, and other very positive rumors have circulated about HD-DVD.
The *actual* reports are that BluRay players were outselling HD-DVD the entire time, including before the "FUD" (read: truth), even when you didn't count PS3 sales, and even though HD-DVD was cheaper. Before the Warner announcement, HD-DVD player returns were still high relative to BluRay as people found that HD-DVD didn't have the movies they wanted.
The fact of the matter is that HD-DVD was dying, so Warner made their announcement. Not the other way around. The only people still waving the HD-DVD flag are the ones who don't want to admit they backed the wrong horse so badly that they can't look at the situation objectively. For the rest of us, we can finally get off the fence and buy a player.
If you can isolate those tight loops, there's a good chance you can do just that part in C. High-performance should be possible.
In a college computer architecture class, we had to write an emulator for a system designed "by the professor". Basically all tight loops performing really basic operations, and a lot of synchronization. We were given sample microcode and programs to test with, and when we turned it in he ran it with different microcode and programs to guarantee accuracy. Accuracy was required to pass, but your grade was based on performance and clarity.
They only perfect score went to an emulator written in Perl. The built-in hash tables, and some smart programming combined with the ease of parsing the microcode and program data created not only the fastest (some classmates used C, C++, lisp, or Java to write their emulators) emulator, but also the easiest to read of the group.
It's the programmer that creates slow, unreadable code, not the language.
A corporation cannot exist without a constant stream of revenue with which to pay its bills. Once the flow becomes low enough, the entire construct will collapse as the individuals who constitute it depart for greener pastures. It may be inconvenient, the individual may have to grow his own food or create his own products, but he depends less on the corporation than it depends on him.
You have to take a step back and look at the big picture. Yes, *a* corporation is more dependent on individuals than the individuals are on the company.... But of course that makes sense since the company is made up of individuals. But think about multiple companies, in different markets. Taking away the infrastructure doesn't kill one company. It kills the network of companies that (even if you have no direct relationship to them) make you, as a member of our society, significantly more wealthy. Think about the alternative societal structures we've had prior to this one, and consider how your life would be different without the symbiotic relationship between corporations of people, and individuals.
So, you're right. You may have to grow your own food, or create your own "products", but that would only be true if your parents, or your great-great-grandparents were even wealthy enough to raise children into a position where they had the means to do that, and not live a more subservient life.
I've actually heard of cases of this in the past, where the only reason the doctors noticed was because the recipient had gained the donor's peanut allergy. Perhaps that means it's not related to the CMV, but merely that the liver does more than we think...
The relationship between the citizen and the corporation in your example is symbiotic, and enriches both participants (even if not equally). That is the reason that the health of the corporate economy has such an immediate impact on the lifestyles of middle and lower class citizens.
The fact of the matter is that it *isn't* easier for you to do without than it is for the corporation to do without. You benefit almost equally from the public resource as the corporation. The real difference is that you benefit indirectly, while the corporation in your example benefits directly.
And a mass migration of the population into urban centers.
I can change my mindset all I want. It doesn't change the fact that though I live within 20 miles of Boston I've never had the option of using public transit to commute to my job because the public transit simply didn't go from where I was to where I needed to be.
If you're in the middle of the few square miles of dense urban environment that make up the center of a large city, public transit is great. If you live slightly outside of that it may not be great, but may be passable. If you live any farther than that it's just plain impossible. People who live in their sheltered little urban environment tend to forget that when they start to get all preachy about how we should all stop being stuck-up and take the bus to work.
HÃkon implies that having IE8 support ACID2 by default is actually a realistic option. I don't believe he is an idiot, so he must just be purposely lying.
Go back and read the first paragraph of your post again. If that's all the ACID tests were about, do you really think anybody would care about them? Have you considered the fact that perhaps it is you who doesn't know what you are talking about? You should consider that.
The ACID2 test is *not* about "seeing a smiley face on one page out of all the pages on the internet". It's about not having to develop a version of your complex website for every browser you wish to be able to display your page correctly, and it's about being able to use whichever browser you want to view the pages you want to visit. This tag defeats both of those purposes, as you will have to add special Microsoft stuff to your page to support IE8, and you will have to go back to IE8 or IE7 to view pages which choose to add this tag rather than become standards compliant.
Some day somebody will have to explain the lure of in-game housing to me. I've tried it in Puzzle Pirates, and I've asked my friends that play LotR, and the best answer I can get was "Yeah, it seemed cool at the time". If you want to play "The Sims", then you can go play "The Sims" without a monthly fee.... Housing just seems like a money sink for poorly balanced game economies.
My definition of justice is a mutually agreed upon set of compromises selected to ensure the maximum possible percentage of the population considers the handling of each particular situation as "fair".
I ask because Microsoft is not about to drop compatibility with billions of pages that unfortunately rely on IE6-specific shortcomings and rendering quirks.
But that is what they should do. They should do it because it benefits *everybody*. Including themselves.
Such a move is exactly what would be required to get those sites to comply with standards which would make cross-browser compatibility easier. It would improve the web experience better for people who use browsers other than IE. It would make it possible for them to develop and support (and provide security fixes for) fewer rendering engines. The only downside is that it would make it possible for other browsers to compete on features rather than giving IE a huge upper-hand.
The one thing it *wouldn't* do is "break the web". Only Microsoft arrogance (or Microsoft fanboy arrogance) can possibly think that is the case. You certainly couldn't comfortably use Firefox if that was the case. Corporations would hold off on upgrading to IE8 until the sites they needed came into compliance, and the sites would change rapidly since the only relevant ones left that are using IE6/7 quirks are the ones that hang on Microsoft's every word.
Slashdot Mirror
20mbps cable with what as downstream?
Verizon just upped all the 20mbit connections in my area to 25mbit for free. They've certainly got the back-end to cover it, since it's easy to get 2.8 or so MBps downloads. The upstream is 5Mbps. 25mbps is the entry level cheapest connection, you can pay slightly more to get 50mbps.
Good luck with that 20mbps down when you've only got 768k up. You need to ACK, after all.
Since there are still plenty of Gigabit Token Ring networks in existence, prediction of LANs demise should come from somebody who doesn't think Token Ring is dead for it to be credible.
10 years after the last RS232->Dumb terminal network is retired, *maybe* we'll see the retirement of the last 10base-T Ethernet LAN. Maybe. Entrenched technology doesn't die, no matter how much you wish it would.
One pirated CD copy is worth more than a human life!
An above-average wrongful death compensation award for a healthy working parent would be in the $1-3 million dollar range. You could go murder somebody. It'd be cheaper than pirating a few CDs. And if the CDs had DRM, the jail sentence would be shorter for the murder too! The US military pays out $600 for wrongful deaths in Iraq. A pirated CD copy is worth more than 2500 Iraqis!
In reality though, they're probably asking for so much in hopes that the compromise amount will be high. Hopefully congress tells them to fuck off instead of coming up with a "compromise" that is right in line with what they were really hoping for anyway.
I'm curious as to when your audit was. The one I describe was in 1999. They may have changed practices since... Or you might have gotten lucky... Or somebody higher up on the chain from you might have greased some palms...
And it's not a matter of "agreeing." It happened exactly as I described.
For the conspiracy theorists out there, I'd like to add that the servers at said company ran Linux, even though the workstations were NT.
Docsis 3.0 can't even come close unless your cable company is running their lines point-to-point (they aren't). Remember that the bandwidth is shared amongst yourself and your neighbors. They can't give you the whole pipe.
Look at how fast Docsis 2.0 is (42Mbps), and how little of that they can sell you... And even then they're over provisioning. So Docsis 3.0 is 4x faster... That means maybe they can up your cable modem spped by 4x? So your 7Mbps connection becomes 28? Fios is already at 50Mbps and they've got room to go up from there. The cable companies are essentially screwed in every market where they have to compete with FTTP.
Keeping certificates is not enough. I worked for a company that got audited once. It was a small business, but run by a pair of lawyers who were sticklers for details. They shredded old paperwork after some number of years, and they got nailed because they had the certificates that came with NT 4.0, but not the receipts.
I honestly believe you could do everything by the book, and they'd still find something to nail you for... Not to mention that the audit costs your business in both time and money.
You're right. The number is way off. Delivering 50 billion text messages in the UK saves them millions of dollars. Yes, that's right.
SMS users didn't pick up the phone and send 100x more data per second to get their message across. A cell user that texts heavily instead of making phone calls doesn't use up as much capacity in the cell as somebody on a voice call. The provider doesn't need to build as many towers, or expand their network nearly as quickly since many of their new customers text instead of calling. SMS traffic uses such a tiny percentage of the networks capacity that it's practically non-existent compared to voice traffic.
Cell companies turn a profit on their voice and data traffic, which is orders of magnitudes more expensive to provide. You can even load up your phone's browser and use an SMS gateway, and they're still turning a profit on you. SMS charges are ridiculously high from a gross margin perspective.
Free speech *does* cover such things, though. You won't be thrown in jail for what you said. You'll be thrown in jail for the outcome of what you said. If you yell "Fire" in a crowded theater, and mass hysteria doesn't ensue, you would almost certainly win a case on constitutional grounds should somebody try to prosecute you.
Free speech doesn't mean that you are free from taking responsibility for your actions. If your actions cause mass panic and civil unrest, you're going to face the consequences, regardless of whether those actions were merely "exercising your right to free speech" or not.
Back on topic though.... Having a home geiger counter is a fantastic idea if you want to be sure you aren't exposed to Radon.
You have demonstrated a lack of understanding of the concept of "energy". You have failed the entrance criteria for participation in an educated discussion of the concepts involved in this thread. It would be pointless at this juncture to bother rebutting the rest of the assertions in your post. Please turn in your login and password on the way out.
Thanks. Bye!
That's because the odds of it killing somebody are almost astronomically lower than the odds of it landing in the middle of nowhere, but reachable by somebody who we'd rather didn't find it.
Chances are it's going to land in the ocean. Chances are that if it doesn't land in the ocean it's going to hit unoccupied land.
Causing an international incident really is the biggest worry here. Worrying about somebody getting killed by this thing is equivalent to worrying that somebody who lives on a back-road in the sticks is going to have an 18-wheeler drive off the road and hit their living room... Except that the truck accident scenario is actually more likely.
Which is presumably what this thing has run out of...
Those numbers don't even pass the laugh test. I don't understand why anybody who wants to have a shred of credibility would have published them. Anybody who has used more than one of those languages knows that 100:1 for Python or PHP compared to C++ is *bullshit*, as is even 1.5:1 for Java. You may be able to find some corner case where some specific operation make the statement true, but the article conveniently neglects to mention what they are testing to get those numbers.
Yes. Interpreted languages are slower than compiled languages. But you say "Sorry" like you're implying I was arguing otherwise. What I was arguing was two things: that when you are working under development time constraints, it is often easy to write a *much* faster application in a feature rich interpreted language than you can in the same amount of time in a less featured language, and that proper selection of algorithm with an eye towards computational complexity can be dozens of orders of magnitude more important than what language you select.
The article you reference is especially ironic, since it does a fantastic job of pointing out the shortcomings of the application framework (Rails in that case), and then confuses the language with the framework in his argument and unreferenced "data". In other words, he was keen to start a holy war, but he doesn't understand basic concepts. I guess he thinks he has some credibility because he's from Berkeley, and that we won't notice his bias by clicking though to his company's website which claims they "[use] the latest Microsoft technology to redefine the human/computer interface". Easy to pick the right tool for the job when the job is defined by the tool...
No, the "entire time" means since BluRay was released and caught up to HD-DVD (which came out first) after just two weeks. The entire time means the *entire time*. And those numbers come from Nielson/VideoScan, not "Home Media Magazine".
Closer to 20%, actually. Compared to 33% or so for the 360. And only if you don't count the PS2, in which case the two are statistically equivalent. Given your 1% argument, I think you'd see the merit of still including the best selling console on the market...
The question is, can BluRay's win cause the PS3 to make up its mere 6 million unit gap?
The *actual* reports are that BluRay players were outselling HD-DVD the entire time, including before the "FUD" (read: truth), even when you didn't count PS3 sales, and even though HD-DVD was cheaper. Before the Warner announcement, HD-DVD player returns were still high relative to BluRay as people found that HD-DVD didn't have the movies they wanted.
Data. (Read the post from 1/21, and note that PS3 isn't included in the numbers)
The fact of the matter is that HD-DVD was dying, so Warner made their announcement. Not the other way around. The only people still waving the HD-DVD flag are the ones who don't want to admit they backed the wrong horse so badly that they can't look at the situation objectively. For the rest of us, we can finally get off the fence and buy a player.
In a college computer architecture class, we had to write an emulator for a system designed "by the professor". Basically all tight loops performing really basic operations, and a lot of synchronization. We were given sample microcode and programs to test with, and when we turned it in he ran it with different microcode and programs to guarantee accuracy. Accuracy was required to pass, but your grade was based on performance and clarity.
They only perfect score went to an emulator written in Perl. The built-in hash tables, and some smart programming combined with the ease of parsing the microcode and program data created not only the fastest (some classmates used C, C++, lisp, or Java to write their emulators) emulator, but also the easiest to read of the group.
It's the programmer that creates slow, unreadable code, not the language.
You have to take a step back and look at the big picture. Yes, *a* corporation is more dependent on individuals than the individuals are on the company.... But of course that makes sense since the company is made up of individuals. But think about multiple companies, in different markets. Taking away the infrastructure doesn't kill one company. It kills the network of companies that (even if you have no direct relationship to them) make you, as a member of our society, significantly more wealthy. Think about the alternative societal structures we've had prior to this one, and consider how your life would be different without the symbiotic relationship between corporations of people, and individuals.
So, you're right. You may have to grow your own food, or create your own "products", but that would only be true if your parents, or your great-great-grandparents were even wealthy enough to raise children into a position where they had the means to do that, and not live a more subservient life.
Are your hours billable to a customer?
I've actually heard of cases of this in the past, where the only reason the doctors noticed was because the recipient had gained the donor's peanut allergy. Perhaps that means it's not related to the CMV, but merely that the liver does more than we think...
That's a big enormous load of bull-crap.
The relationship between the citizen and the corporation in your example is symbiotic, and enriches both participants (even if not equally). That is the reason that the health of the corporate economy has such an immediate impact on the lifestyles of middle and lower class citizens.
The fact of the matter is that it *isn't* easier for you to do without than it is for the corporation to do without. You benefit almost equally from the public resource as the corporation. The real difference is that you benefit indirectly, while the corporation in your example benefits directly.
And a mass migration of the population into urban centers.
I can change my mindset all I want. It doesn't change the fact that though I live within 20 miles of Boston I've never had the option of using public transit to commute to my job because the public transit simply didn't go from where I was to where I needed to be.
If you're in the middle of the few square miles of dense urban environment that make up the center of a large city, public transit is great. If you live slightly outside of that it may not be great, but may be passable. If you live any farther than that it's just plain impossible. People who live in their sheltered little urban environment tend to forget that when they start to get all preachy about how we should all stop being stuck-up and take the bus to work.
Go back and read the first paragraph of your post again. If that's all the ACID tests were about, do you really think anybody would care about them? Have you considered the fact that perhaps it is you who doesn't know what you are talking about? You should consider that.
The ACID2 test is *not* about "seeing a smiley face on one page out of all the pages on the internet". It's about not having to develop a version of your complex website for every browser you wish to be able to display your page correctly, and it's about being able to use whichever browser you want to view the pages you want to visit. This tag defeats both of those purposes, as you will have to add special Microsoft stuff to your page to support IE8, and you will have to go back to IE8 or IE7 to view pages which choose to add this tag rather than become standards compliant.
Some day somebody will have to explain the lure of in-game housing to me. I've tried it in Puzzle Pirates, and I've asked my friends that play LotR, and the best answer I can get was "Yeah, it seemed cool at the time". If you want to play "The Sims", then you can go play "The Sims" without a monthly fee.... Housing just seems like a money sink for poorly balanced game economies.
My definition of justice is a mutually agreed upon set of compromises selected to ensure the maximum possible percentage of the population considers the handling of each particular situation as "fair".
Your turn.
But that is what they should do. They should do it because it benefits *everybody*. Including themselves.
Such a move is exactly what would be required to get those sites to comply with standards which would make cross-browser compatibility easier. It would improve the web experience better for people who use browsers other than IE. It would make it possible for them to develop and support (and provide security fixes for) fewer rendering engines. The only downside is that it would make it possible for other browsers to compete on features rather than giving IE a huge upper-hand.
The one thing it *wouldn't* do is "break the web". Only Microsoft arrogance (or Microsoft fanboy arrogance) can possibly think that is the case. You certainly couldn't comfortably use Firefox if that was the case. Corporations would hold off on upgrading to IE8 until the sites they needed came into compliance, and the sites would change rapidly since the only relevant ones left that are using IE6/7 quirks are the ones that hang on Microsoft's every word.