It's not expensive for marketers at the rates being discussed. Look at how much junk mail we get. They're paying considerably more per piece via regular mail. This email solution is still far far cheaper, and much more accessible.
Bandwidth is minimal. I had about 160MB of spam last year (20,000 messages). My ISP gives me a bandwidth quota of 100GB/month. It's not even on the same scale.
Well junk mail pisses me off. It clutters up my mailbox, it attracts attention when I'm away, and it's bad for the environment (I wish the postman and people leaving flyers would save me the effort and just deposit it directly in to my recycling bin if they're going to insist on leaving it).
Spam is a problem. I get about a 150-250 messages a day, of which 0-20 are typically legitimate. Why should I be forced to give up the email address I've had for a decade? Legitimate email either gets missed in the flood, or if I use anti-spam methods, there will always be false-positives.
And Britain 200 years ago wasn't expansionist. It was just protecting its trade and wealth generation. The parallels with the US today are great in number. Although back then the British government ran up a debt of 30x their annual income trying to achieve naval supremacy over all others to protect its trade.
Switch HDMI to DVI, and would you be complaining the same way? Seems to be an inane/. prejudice against HDMI. And yes, they all go to the same device: the receiver. But, there's no reason why you have to do that. You can just use it as a DVI (maybe not quite correct, but I'm saying that to emphasise my point) cable to the TV and still run your audio over coax to the receiver, if you want. In fact I do this with one of my Blu-ray players. I couldn't care less if I had a DVI or HDMI cable at that point. Better than the clunky analogue component cable which is hard to see which connector goes where in the low light conditions behind the equipment. Nah: HDMI is easiest and most convenient.
TOS is really a load of toss. I see no benefit to that compared to coax. In fact it's worse. I tried running an optical switch for a while because my receiver didn't have enough optical inputs. Most of the devices wouldn't work with it. Bought a cheap RCA switch (not an over-priced audio switch) and use the digital coax through the video line on that (arbitrary: could just as easily chosen one of the left or right audio). Presumably with coax too, you can get away just using el-cheapo RCA cables. The connectors are the same.
HDMI was not designed as a solution to an engineering problem. It was designed as an anti-consumer technology in the first place
Oh for fucksake, how much more of this inane bollocks do I have to read with this story? There is so much ignorance amongst/.ers about this. Go and read about HDCP, which is compatible with both DVI and HDMI. HDMI was engineered to be consumer friendly by carrying a DVI video signal (or at least backwardly compatible with it) and digital audio signal through one cable. It's so much easier to hook it up than the older alternatives.
Yes. There's a very nice BenQ 24" monitor on the market that does HDCP over both a DVI and an HDMI input. What do most HDCP capable graphics cards use for output - DVI or HDMI? I'm guessing the former. And you can use an DVI->HDMI adapter if you need to.
HDMI & DVI are identical for video. I can plug the DVI output of one device in to the HDMI input of another, and vice versa. Both HDMI and DVI allow HDCP, which is probably the DRM bit that you're thinking of. The HDCP handshake has to occur whether you use HDMI or DVI.
Very happy with Vonage for the last seven months thank you. Occasionally sound quality problems, but far easier to use, far more flexible, and half the price.
This chap's in Toronto - he can get "dry DSL". That's DSL without a dial tone. Don't blame him for not wanted to with the utterly shit Rogers (only major GSM provider) or Bell/Telus (major POTS telcos with backwards N. American vendor-lock technology).
Must be an American thing because I saw very few of them when I was growing up. I see very people pulling things over here compared with where I came from, although that seems to be the most common excuse people use for their monstrous vehicles.
What did people do 20+ years ago before this truck and SUV thing happened? Did people just not pull trailers?
Growing up in Europe, I remember it being very common for people with regular cars to pull caravans all over the continent for their summer holidays. Why is it suddenly a problem for regular cars today? I just don't buy your argument. It also makes me wonder how occasionally you need it... if it really is occasionally, perhaps it would be cheaper to own a smaller cheaper car that is also more efficient and then rent something more powerful when you need to pull a trailer.
What a load of twaddle. If you want to be a sucker paying the telco's rates, go ahead.
Anyway, your premise about the maintenance of the copper is utter BS. Vonage requires that one has an internet connection. That is where the telco or cable company or whoever is paid.
I pay my ISP (again, not the telco) for DSL service. They pay a wholesale rate for leasing the DSLAM port, etc, to the telco. The telco is still making money, but without having to provide support and infrastructure. So it's better than if I were a direct customer! The telcos around here offer "dry DSL"... that's DSL without providing a dialtone too. If I didn't have Vonage, I could just stick with a mobile phone... is wireless phone service also a leech? It would be according to your [illogical] argument.
I think it's more interesting comparing technology in other places, such as the kitchen or cars. It's quite shocking coming from Europe and living in N. American homes and being confronted by stoves out of the 50's (and further: why isn't the oven divided? Why do I have to heat a small pizza in the space big enough to cook a 30lb turkey?), washing machines that barely work and cars from the big three that are immensely irritating. After a decade, I'm mostly used to it, but when I go back to visit my parents, I'm always surprised by the dishwasher that I can't hear and uses barely any water, and the laundry machine that sits in a ridiculously small spot, is also silent, efficient and gets things clean that the standard N. American machines with their vertical agitator will either destroy or don't clean well (at least without using huge amounts of chemicals). Computers on the other-hand are an in-your-face technology that seem to at times to exist for themselves (i.e. it's not technology being deployed to quietly enhance an existing part of our lives).
I don't remember John, but I do remember Frank Duff's story of A Coder in Courierland. It resonated with me because I live in Toronto, cycle everywhere all year around, and a friend had just become a courier himself the previous February. I wonder if he (Frank) is still doing it. I thought about it for a while, but in the end I decided I'd rather carry on enjoying cycling rather than turning it in to a grind too, and as I get older, I don't like the idea of depending (rent, food, entertainment, family, etc) on my body remaining healthy and strong (having repeatedly tried to train for a marathon and been knocked back every year by injuries, I've learnt some humility in this area).
They should water-mark the films and identify the offending cinemas. Next time those cinemas will lose ticket sales when other cinemas in the area host advanced showings and they don't.
Or just follow the US example and arrest the executive officers of YouTube/Google at the first opportunity. The US did this recently for some betting agencies in the UK, IIRC.
Does it matter? The point is: I don't have to manage it, any unexpected exceptions will go through the d-tors and free the memory, and I can't accidentally introduce any bugs such as the one the OP had where b was never released. Good coding practices avoid explicitly allocating on the heap and encourage stack objects for this very reason, whether it's for memory allocation or important resources such as a mutex.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not expensive for marketers at the rates being discussed. Look at how much junk mail we get. They're paying considerably more per piece via regular mail. This email solution is still far far cheaper, and much more accessible.
Bandwidth is minimal. I had about 160MB of spam last year (20,000 messages). My ISP gives me a bandwidth quota of 100GB/month. It's not even on the same scale.
Well junk mail pisses me off. It clutters up my mailbox, it attracts attention when I'm away, and it's bad for the environment (I wish the postman and people leaving flyers would save me the effort and just deposit it directly in to my recycling bin if they're going to insist on leaving it).
Spam is a problem. I get about a 150-250 messages a day, of which 0-20 are typically legitimate. Why should I be forced to give up the email address I've had for a decade? Legitimate email either gets missed in the flood, or if I use anti-spam methods, there will always be false-positives.
I've had a 5GHz phone for a year now. How well are they going to coexist?
M-x doctor
M-x psychoanalyze-pinhead
Try them...
And Britain 200 years ago wasn't expansionist. It was just protecting its trade and wealth generation. The parallels with the US today are great in number. Although back then the British government ran up a debt of 30x their annual income trying to achieve naval supremacy over all others to protect its trade.
That's not pricey compared with what it is now.
Switch HDMI to DVI, and would you be complaining the same way? Seems to be an inane /. prejudice against HDMI. And yes, they all go to the same device: the receiver. But, there's no reason why you have to do that. You can just use it as a DVI (maybe not quite correct, but I'm saying that to emphasise my point) cable to the TV and still run your audio over coax to the receiver, if you want. In fact I do this with one of my Blu-ray players. I couldn't care less if I had a DVI or HDMI cable at that point. Better than the clunky analogue component cable which is hard to see which connector goes where in the low light conditions behind the equipment. Nah: HDMI is easiest and most convenient.
TOS is really a load of toss. I see no benefit to that compared to coax. In fact it's worse. I tried running an optical switch for a while because my receiver didn't have enough optical inputs. Most of the devices wouldn't work with it. Bought a cheap RCA switch (not an over-priced audio switch) and use the digital coax through the video line on that (arbitrary: could just as easily chosen one of the left or right audio). Presumably with coax too, you can get away just using el-cheapo RCA cables. The connectors are the same.
Oh for fucksake, how much more of this inane bollocks do I have to read with this story? There is so much ignorance amongst
Yes. There's a very nice BenQ 24" monitor on the market that does HDCP over both a DVI and an HDMI input. What do most HDCP capable graphics cards use for output - DVI or HDMI? I'm guessing the former. And you can use an DVI->HDMI adapter if you need to.
$2.75 or even less for 6ft/2m cable on Amazon
HDMI & DVI are identical for video. I can plug the DVI output of one device in to the HDMI input of another, and vice versa. Both HDMI and DVI allow HDCP, which is probably the DRM bit that you're thinking of. The HDCP handshake has to occur whether you use HDMI or DVI.
HDMI doesn't imply DRM. Are you confusing it with HDCP, which can also be used with straight DVI?
What's up with your Win98 numbers jumping up and down?
Very happy with Vonage for the last seven months thank you. Occasionally sound quality problems, but far easier to use, far more flexible, and half the price.
This chap's in Toronto - he can get "dry DSL". That's DSL without a dial tone. Don't blame him for not wanted to with the utterly shit Rogers (only major GSM provider) or Bell/Telus (major POTS telcos with backwards N. American vendor-lock technology).
Must be an American thing because I saw very few of them when I was growing up. I see very people pulling things over here compared with where I came from, although that seems to be the most common excuse people use for their monstrous vehicles.
I was trying not to think too critically, and phrased it as a question in the search for enlightenment! ;)
What did people do 20+ years ago before this truck and SUV thing happened? Did people just not pull trailers?
Growing up in Europe, I remember it being very common for people with regular cars to pull caravans all over the continent for their summer holidays. Why is it suddenly a problem for regular cars today? I just don't buy your argument. It also makes me wonder how occasionally you need it... if it really is occasionally, perhaps it would be cheaper to own a smaller cheaper car that is also more efficient and then rent something more powerful when you need to pull a trailer.
What a load of twaddle. If you want to be a sucker paying the telco's rates, go ahead.
Anyway, your premise about the maintenance of the copper is utter BS. Vonage requires that one has an internet connection. That is where the telco or cable company or whoever is paid.
I pay my ISP (again, not the telco) for DSL service. They pay a wholesale rate for leasing the DSLAM port, etc, to the telco. The telco is still making money, but without having to provide support and infrastructure. So it's better than if I were a direct customer! The telcos around here offer "dry DSL"... that's DSL without providing a dialtone too. If I didn't have Vonage, I could just stick with a mobile phone... is wireless phone service also a leech? It would be according to your [illogical] argument.
I think it's more interesting comparing technology in other places, such as the kitchen or cars. It's quite shocking coming from Europe and living in N. American homes and being confronted by stoves out of the 50's (and further: why isn't the oven divided? Why do I have to heat a small pizza in the space big enough to cook a 30lb turkey?), washing machines that barely work and cars from the big three that are immensely irritating. After a decade, I'm mostly used to it, but when I go back to visit my parents, I'm always surprised by the dishwasher that I can't hear and uses barely any water, and the laundry machine that sits in a ridiculously small spot, is also silent, efficient and gets things clean that the standard N. American machines with their vertical agitator will either destroy or don't clean well (at least without using huge amounts of chemicals). Computers on the other-hand are an in-your-face technology that seem to at times to exist for themselves (i.e. it's not technology being deployed to quietly enhance an existing part of our lives).
I don't remember John, but I do remember Frank Duff's story of A Coder in Courierland. It resonated with me because I live in Toronto, cycle everywhere all year around, and a friend had just become a courier himself the previous February. I wonder if he (Frank) is still doing it. I thought about it for a while, but in the end I decided I'd rather carry on enjoying cycling rather than turning it in to a grind too, and as I get older, I don't like the idea of depending (rent, food, entertainment, family, etc) on my body remaining healthy and strong (having repeatedly tried to train for a marathon and been knocked back every year by injuries, I've learnt some humility in this area).
They should water-mark the films and identify the offending cinemas. Next time those cinemas will lose ticket sales when other cinemas in the area host advanced showings and they don't.
Or just follow the US example and arrest the executive officers of YouTube/Google at the first opportunity. The US did this recently for some betting agencies in the UK, IIRC.
Does it matter? The point is: I don't have to manage it, any unexpected exceptions will go through the d-tors and free the memory, and I can't accidentally introduce any bugs such as the one the OP had where b was never released. Good coding practices avoid explicitly allocating on the heap and encourage stack objects for this very reason, whether it's for memory allocation or important resources such as a mutex.