They could do what some Cell phone providers do with regular voice usage. You get a limited number of "anytime" minutes depending on how much you pay.
In this case though... that policy as well would be likely to lead to congestion; as it would encourage people to max out their connections "off peak"; resulting in capacity shortages at so-called "off peak" times.
In the world of business internet connections, they have a much better idea: Burstable links with 95th percentile billing
Instead of selling "Unlimited 30 megabit broadband"
You sell "3 megabit commit broadband burstable to 30 megabits"; with 95th percentile billing at 15 minute increments,
that is with the provider committed to provide 3 megabits 24x7, and an extra $5 a month for every megabit over 3 megabits
that the 95th percentile exceeds 3 megabits.
You give your subscriber an allowance, and if they exceed more than twice the commit for two months in a row, then they are required to pay for a "X megabit plan" instead; where X is at least 3/4 of their usage.
No, data transfer is NOT free. The datacenters (HVAC/power), equipment (hello depreciation, upgrade cycles, support contracts), lines (installation/repair), peering arrangements (outside of tier 1 backscratching) are all very expensive, and it takes a small army of people to keep all of this low-volume, insane-price junk running.
You've got it wrong. It's not DATA TRANSFER that is expensive. It is CONCURRENT DEMAND that is expensive.
Suppose I want to download 1 Terabytes of data and upload 1 Terabytes of data.
It will have A VERY DIFFERENT COST for the service provider, if I insist on fully utilizing my 30 megabit link to demand 100% of its throughput for that transfer during peak hours, than if I Spread out my file transfers over a longer period of time, and I structure my demand for capacity, so that it falls at times other than the peak usage hours for their network.
Or if I run that 1TB transfer at 5 Megabit per second 24x7 on my 30 megabit link.
It will take me 20 days worth of time to move that file.
Now, you can't possibly tell me that this costs the provider just as much as me maxing out my connection
24x7 for 3 days to move all 1TB at 30 Megabits/S down and 30Megabits/S up.
Which one do you think REALLY matters to the network?
Hey there troops, listen up! It's your job to sit in this drab, overbuilt concrete coffin, sitting on your lazy asses like the cold war relics you are, until such a time as you are instructed to commit the greatest mass slaughter in human history. Any questions?
I do have a suggested alternative.... Have at least 5 or 6 command post stations; with at least 10 different pairs of watchpeople holding the launch keys.
In the event, that a launch condition is signalled -- a random command post, or a plurality of command posts; is selected to be the command post whose launch keys will activate the launch.
That way..... when the command posts are ordered to turn their keys Nobody at the command posts actually know which key turns will be the final approval for the launch to commence; hence, they will all have plausible deniability.
(2) If terrorists compromise one of the command posts; it will be unlikely that just happens to be the right post that was chosen to signal final approval.
(3) if only one or two command posts turns their keys, then the launch is aborted
(4) the command posts have security cameras monitoring each other; not in such a way as the other command posts can determine if another one has actually turned the keys, BUT in a manner, that a command post can see if another is under duress.
(5) An alternate key, and an alternate keyhole is provided for operators to use, in case under duress; a key that "prohibits" launch and neutralizes that post's abilty to approve ----- instead of approving launch.
Then you're relying on just one byte to never be changed by memory corruption forever.
So are you... your code compiles to something like:
JNE %ebx, 0, 32(%eip)
JNE %ebx, 0, 32(%eip)
JNE %ebx, 0, 32(%eip)
MOV %eax, 16(%esp)
push %eax
call missile_launch
NOP
When the lower order byte of the jump address in memory gets corrupted anywhere in the program, it is possible that the software will erroneously jump directly into the for loop.
The court used the 'we are hackers' statement as evidence that the defendant probably had the means and knowledge to destroy the evidence. Thus, the restraining order was granted.
"Means and knowledge" don't meet the standard required for a restraining order.
They also have to demonstrate history or intent, showing that not only are they capable of disobeying the court; they are likely to disobeye the court or intentionallly commit an act of evidence spoliation
It's the equivalent of holding an accused shoplifter in prison with no bail allowed, because they are a self-described airplane pilot; with a potential ability to fly outside the country and never be heard from again.
This level of trading does not do the market any good, and puts individual investors at a severe disadvantage against firms like this.
Well; it does do the market good... it helps with eliminating inefficiencies.
However; I am of the opinion that there should be a minimum "execution delay"; with all trades timestamped.
Trades should be cleared at 90 second increments; with no trade younger than 120 seconds eligible to be executed.
After 90 seconds have elapsed; the trade should become non-cancellable, non-modifiable, until it as at least 180 seconds old total.
All the orders that arrived within the same 60 second increment, should be randomly shuffled, so that the exact order they arrived within that narrow time frame has no effect on priority.
Finally, trades cleared in order --- with only trades placed in different 60 second windows having priority over one another.
Your post is
( ) full of myths, common errors, and logical mistakes
( x ) a form flame
( ) a bunch of nonsense
( ) a pile of dog shit
( ) a commission of philosophical thoughtcrime
( ) Full of rambling and fallacious arguments
Your criticism is not genuine. Here is why it is not genuine:
( x ) TL; DR
( ) It was too wordy
( x ) You checked boxes in your form flame that don't apply to the current situation.
( x ) You failed to check boxes in your form flame that apply to the current situation.
( ) There is no apparent logical structure of your post
( ) Your post is clearly talking about an imaginary world
Specifically, in your rush to post, you failed to account for:
( x ) The premature criticism of proposed ideas or concepts supplied by your post
( ) Posts like yours are only written by infidels.
( ) Ego cogito sum.
( ) English is the language that we speak.
( x ) A proper post or comment, does not contain checkboxes or other oddities.
( x ) The power of Obama's booming voice
( x ) The US government's role as a world power
( ) The power of idiots in large numbers
( x ) The power of free markets (aka the rich elite)
( x ) Vendors promising it will work, anyways
( ) The extreme reach of NSA authority
( ) Solutions that seem at first to be unacceptable, may be the only option
Your post also commits the following offenses:
( x ) Discouragement of rational discourse
( x ) Nonsensical objections against "good enough" pragmatic solutions, or solution that might work, on idealogical basis
( ) Lack of a cogent argument
( ) The conclusion of your argument does not follow from the premise.
( x ) If it is simple, it must be wrong
( x ) Backwards compatibility is always required
( ) You are begging the question.
( ) You have committed unspeakable abortions of logic and rational thinking.
Furthermore, this is where I think you should stick it:
I'm thinking of like: a web application, where you can upload a picture of some random politician of your choice.
And then the site will create an animation where there is a fake beheading, and, through the power of computer graphics; a plain color background is displayed, with the head replaced with a stub.
These fake beheadings could then be virally shared on FB
You really think some 60s cold-war-era outdated agreements designed to stop the commies from putting nukes in orbit are still respected today by any of the countries?
Any open source competitor will need to be hosted, provide better facilities, have a clear migration path and have format compatibility for any hope in the future.
Format compatibility is a non-starter. Format compatibility for open source software will always be: Export your Office document to RTF, PDF, or another standard format.
Nothing stops these UAVs from flying in the same airspace as planes carrying people - all it takes is a little software malfunction. They are small and hard to see, aren't in radio contact with air traffic controllers, and don't show up on radar.
They're also small, perhaps a few feet wingspan, and probably pose about as much danger to a commercial aircraft, as a bird hitting the windscreen.
The problem was that the town bordered another town and when word got out people simply drove a few hundred yards to get drunk in the next town's bars.
It sounds like a chance for a collaboration between the two police departments of the bordering towns...
Yeah, they got people to move elsewhere --- their failing was not working together to catch the people at the new bars they started migrating to.
In just a few months collaboration, they could have massively reduced drinking and driving by bar tenants --- so much so, that they would then have to be back looking for drunk drivers elsewhere (the people at bars having learned their lesson for a bit).
However, at that point we're no longer talking about creating a super bug in the lab.
There are plenty of real superbugs that have existed and plenty of things that might evolve to be superbugs someday; there is not necessarily a need for a lab to manufacture them.
If the presence of the synthetic bacteria increases the probability of certain families of mutated genes surviving or spreading,
then it opens up new paths by which superbugs might evolve.
Because they re-purposed what is normally a stop codon, a wild bacterium would chop up any protein coded with it.
Yes; however, think of a sequence from wild bacteria becoming embeded in the genetic sequence of the synthetic bacteria.
The gene could be completely dormant embedded in the synthetic bacteria; but when acquired by another wild bacteria, part of the sequence containing what the acquiring bacterium will interpret as a stop codon, results in it being chopped up, and the trojan-horse gene becoming activated.
Think of this in terms of viruses... and viral infection vectors.
A different type of organism treating the stop codon differently, might create the required conditions for a biological "Code Injection" style attack; eg SQL Injection.
The only way to control for this is to conduct weapons testing (a geopolitical non-starter) or to continue to produce new fissile materials with known quantities.
How about underground testing on the moon?
(A place outside geopolitical boundaries, free from environmental concerns, and not governed by any nation on earth)
Do you crinkle in fear each time a car comes at you from the opposite direction? Every time you get on a plane?
Lots of potentially dangerous actions in your life, many other people can terminate it accidentally or on purpose.
At least if a car going the opposite direction crashes into you, or the airplane pilot crashes the plane their life and property is in serious jeapordy as well.
The true definition of species is a group that can and do inter-breed to make offspring. So, the line actually *IS* very clear cut... as soon as a mutation occurs that branches one set so they can no longer reproduce with the other, it is a new species.
That's one form of speciation. Another form, is some of the species settle in a different region --- with a very larger distance between two groups of the same species, they will become a different species, because they don't interbreed: even if they are still physically able to breed --- they won't.
They'll meet the can requirement, but because they are separated by distance they won't; failing the can and do requirement.
What! Science says that there were three different species of humans, now it says that there was only one. See. Scientists keep changing their mind. How could you put your faith in them?
Science evolves, based on the results of new experiments, and the acquisition of new information.
Religious doctrine on the other hand; always stays the same, even when factual information proves something wrong.
For example: it was proven that the earth and other planets revolve around the sun.
Put your faith in Jesus, by all means. But don't be a dogmatic moron, and think that your religion tells you what all the historic and physical facts are.
Jesus never said anything about God having created everything directly with a wave of the hand, not through any indirect mysterious processes such as evolution.
Slashdot Mirror
They could do what some Cell phone providers do with regular voice usage. You get a limited number of "anytime" minutes depending on how much you pay.
In this case though... that policy as well would be likely to lead to congestion; as it would encourage people to max out their connections "off peak"; resulting in capacity shortages at so-called "off peak" times.
In the world of business internet connections, they have a much better idea: Burstable links with 95th percentile billing
Instead of selling "Unlimited 30 megabit broadband"
You sell "3 megabit commit broadband burstable to 30 megabits"; with 95th percentile billing at 15 minute increments, that is with the provider committed to provide 3 megabits 24x7, and an extra $5 a month for every megabit over 3 megabits that the 95th percentile exceeds 3 megabits.
You give your subscriber an allowance, and if they exceed more than twice the commit for two months in a row, then they are required to pay for a "X megabit plan" instead; where X is at least 3/4 of their usage.
No, data transfer is NOT free. The datacenters (HVAC/power), equipment (hello depreciation, upgrade cycles, support contracts), lines (installation/repair), peering arrangements (outside of tier 1 backscratching) are all very expensive, and it takes a small army of people to keep all of this low-volume, insane-price junk running.
You've got it wrong. It's not DATA TRANSFER that is expensive. It is CONCURRENT DEMAND that is expensive.
Suppose I want to download 1 Terabytes of data and upload 1 Terabytes of data.
It will have A VERY DIFFERENT COST for the service provider, if I insist on fully utilizing my 30 megabit link to demand 100% of its throughput for that transfer during peak hours, than if I Spread out my file transfers over a longer period of time, and I structure my demand for capacity, so that it falls at times other than the peak usage hours for their network.
Or if I run that 1TB transfer at 5 Megabit per second 24x7 on my 30 megabit link.
It will take me 20 days worth of time to move that file.
Now, you can't possibly tell me that this costs the provider just as much as me maxing out my connection 24x7 for 3 days to move all 1TB at 30 Megabits/S down and 30Megabits/S up.
Which one do you think REALLY matters to the network?
CAPACITY DEMAND or data usage?
Hey there troops, listen up! It's your job to sit in this drab, overbuilt concrete coffin, sitting on your lazy asses like the cold war relics you are, until such a time as you are instructed to commit the greatest mass slaughter in human history. Any questions?
I do have a suggested alternative.... Have at least 5 or 6 command post stations; with at least 10 different pairs of watchpeople holding the launch keys.
In the event, that a launch condition is signalled -- a random command post, or a plurality of command posts; is selected to be the command post whose launch keys will activate the launch.
That way..... when the command posts are ordered to turn their keys Nobody at the command posts actually know which key turns will be the final approval for the launch to commence; hence, they will all have plausible deniability.
(2) If terrorists compromise one of the command posts; it will be unlikely that just happens to be the right post that was chosen to signal final approval.
(3) if only one or two command posts turns their keys, then the launch is aborted
(4) the command posts have security cameras monitoring each other; not in such a way as the other command posts can determine if another one has actually turned the keys, BUT in a manner, that a command post can see if another is under duress.
(5) An alternate key, and an alternate keyhole is provided for operators to use, in case under duress; a key that "prohibits" launch and neutralizes that post's abilty to approve ----- instead of approving launch.
Then you're relying on just one byte to never be changed by memory corruption forever.
So are you... your code compiles to something like:
JNE %ebx, 0, 32(%eip)
JNE %ebx, 0, 32(%eip)
JNE %ebx, 0, 32(%eip)
MOV %eax, 16(%esp)
push %eax
call missile_launch
NOP
When the lower order byte of the jump address in memory gets corrupted anywhere in the program, it is possible that the software will erroneously jump directly into the for loop.
The court used the 'we are hackers' statement as evidence that the defendant probably had the means and knowledge to destroy the evidence. Thus, the restraining order was granted.
"Means and knowledge" don't meet the standard required for a restraining order.
They also have to demonstrate history or intent, showing that not only are they capable of disobeying the court; they are likely to disobeye the court or intentionallly commit an act of evidence spoliation
It's the equivalent of holding an accused shoplifter in prison with no bail allowed, because they are a self-described airplane pilot; with a potential ability to fly outside the country and never be heard from again.
This was caused by AT, and you are complaining about HFS.
If it was not HFS; then why were the orders not being presented for human approval?
This level of trading does not do the market any good, and puts individual investors at a severe disadvantage against firms like this.
Well; it does do the market good... it helps with eliminating inefficiencies.
However; I am of the opinion that there should be a minimum "execution delay"; with all trades timestamped.
Trades should be cleared at 90 second increments; with no trade younger than 120 seconds eligible to be executed. After 90 seconds have elapsed; the trade should become non-cancellable, non-modifiable, until it as at least 180 seconds old total.
All the orders that arrived within the same 60 second increment, should be randomly shuffled, so that the exact order they arrived within that narrow time frame has no effect on priority.
Finally, trades cleared in order --- with only trades placed in different 60 second windows having priority over one another.
See, the private sector can blow money faster than the public sector (OmabaCare site).
The federal government incurs over $3 million in new debt per minute on average.
The annual extra interest expense on the national debt (taxpayer money lost due to interest volume) is on the order of $500 billion.
$172,222 a Second For 45 Minutes is an order of magnitude less .
Your post is ( ) full of myths, common errors, and logical mistakes
( x ) a form flame
( ) a bunch of nonsense
( ) a pile of dog shit
( ) a commission of philosophical thoughtcrime
( ) Full of rambling and fallacious arguments
Your criticism is not genuine. Here is why it is not genuine:
( x ) TL; DR
( ) It was too wordy
( x ) You checked boxes in your form flame that don't apply to the current situation.
( x ) You failed to check boxes in your form flame that apply to the current situation.
( ) There is no apparent logical structure of your post
( ) Your post is clearly talking about an imaginary world
Specifically, in your rush to post, you failed to account for:
( x ) The premature criticism of proposed ideas or concepts supplied by your post
( ) Posts like yours are only written by infidels.
( ) Ego cogito sum.
( ) English is the language that we speak.
( x ) A proper post or comment, does not contain checkboxes or other oddities.
( x ) The power of Obama's booming voice
( x ) The US government's role as a world power
( ) The power of idiots in large numbers
( x ) The power of free markets (aka the rich elite)
( x ) Vendors promising it will work, anyways
( ) The extreme reach of NSA authority
( ) Solutions that seem at first to be unacceptable, may be the only option
Your post also commits the following offenses:
( x ) Discouragement of rational discourse
( x ) Nonsensical objections against "good enough" pragmatic solutions, or solution that might work, on idealogical basis
( ) Lack of a cogent argument
( ) The conclusion of your argument does not follow from the premise.
( x ) If it is simple, it must be wrong
( x ) Backwards compatibility is always required
( ) You are begging the question. ( ) You have committed unspeakable abortions of logic and rational thinking.
Furthermore, this is where I think you should stick it:
This page intentionally left blank
I'm thinking of like: a web application, where you can upload a picture of some random politician of your choice.
And then the site will create an animation where there is a fake beheading, and, through the power of computer graphics; a plain color background is displayed, with the head replaced with a stub.
These fake beheadings could then be virally shared on FB
Good god, man! That's such a poor spelling of the word jeopardy that I've actually forgotten how to correctly spell it!
Please don't midn my tendency to sometimes sawp lettres around or type them out of order.
I feel to need to point out that if your programming speed is constrained by your typing speed, you're not doing nearly enough thinking.
My programming speed is sometimes constrained by my typing speed, and I can type at 85 WPM with 99% accuracy.
"rm: cannot remove '/':Read-only file system"
You really think some 60s cold-war-era outdated agreements designed to stop the commies from putting nukes in orbit are still respected today by any of the countries?
Any open source competitor will need to be hosted, provide better facilities, have a clear migration path and have format compatibility for any hope in the future.
Format compatibility is a non-starter. Format compatibility for open source software will always be: Export your Office document to RTF, PDF, or another standard format.
Nothing stops these UAVs from flying in the same airspace as planes carrying people - all it takes is a little software malfunction. They are small and hard to see, aren't in radio contact with air traffic controllers, and don't show up on radar.
They're also small, perhaps a few feet wingspan, and probably pose about as much danger to a commercial aircraft, as a bird hitting the windscreen.
The problem was that the town bordered another town and when word got out people simply drove a few hundred yards to get drunk in the next town's bars.
It sounds like a chance for a collaboration between the two police departments of the bordering towns...
Yeah, they got people to move elsewhere --- their failing was not working together to catch the people at the new bars they started migrating to.
In just a few months collaboration, they could have massively reduced drinking and driving by bar tenants --- so much so, that they would then have to be back looking for drunk drivers elsewhere (the people at bars having learned their lesson for a bit).
You can't operate it for profit. e.g. Aerial photography of real estate.
What happens if you operate it for non-profit... and then at a later date profit from it?
E.g. you post a youtube video of it.... you later decide to add advertisements; you get some click-revenue
However, at that point we're no longer talking about creating a super bug in the lab.
There are plenty of real superbugs that have existed and plenty of things that might evolve to be superbugs someday; there is not necessarily a need for a lab to manufacture them.
If the presence of the synthetic bacteria increases the probability of certain families of mutated genes surviving or spreading, then it opens up new paths by which superbugs might evolve.
Are they adding lorentz contraction and wormholes to minecraft as well?
Because they re-purposed what is normally a stop codon, a wild bacterium would chop up any protein coded with it.
Yes; however, think of a sequence from wild bacteria becoming embeded in the genetic sequence of the synthetic bacteria.
The gene could be completely dormant embedded in the synthetic bacteria; but when acquired by another wild bacteria, part of the sequence containing what the acquiring bacterium will interpret as a stop codon, results in it being chopped up, and the trojan-horse gene becoming activated.
Think of this in terms of viruses... and viral infection vectors.
A different type of organism treating the stop codon differently, might create the required conditions for a biological "Code Injection" style attack; eg SQL Injection.
The only way to control for this is to conduct weapons testing (a geopolitical non-starter) or to continue to produce new fissile materials with known quantities.
How about underground testing on the moon? (A place outside geopolitical boundaries, free from environmental concerns, and not governed by any nation on earth)
Do you crinkle in fear each time a car comes at you from the opposite direction? Every time you get on a plane?
Lots of potentially dangerous actions in your life, many other people can terminate it accidentally or on purpose.
At least if a car going the opposite direction crashes into you, or the airplane pilot crashes the plane their life and property is in serious jeapordy as well.
The true definition of species is a group that can and do inter-breed to make offspring. So, the line actually *IS* very clear cut... as soon as a mutation occurs that branches one set so they can no longer reproduce with the other, it is a new species.
That's one form of speciation. Another form, is some of the species settle in a different region --- with a very larger distance between two groups of the same species, they will become a different species, because they don't interbreed: even if they are still physically able to breed --- they won't.
They'll meet the can requirement, but because they are separated by distance they won't; failing the can and do requirement.
What! Science says that there were three different species of humans, now it says that there was only one. See. Scientists keep changing their mind. How could you put your faith in them?
Science evolves, based on the results of new experiments, and the acquisition of new information.
Religious doctrine on the other hand; always stays the same, even when factual information proves something wrong.
For example: it was proven that the earth and other planets revolve around the sun.
Put your faith in Jesus, by all means. But don't be a dogmatic moron, and think that your religion tells you what all the historic and physical facts are.
Jesus never said anything about God having created everything directly with a wave of the hand, not through any indirect mysterious processes such as evolution.