Funny how A la carte works in the U.S. but for some reason can't work in Canada.
There are a few city and county governments that mandate a la carte be an option. The customer pays a flat rate of ~$10 which incudes all the free shopping and broadcast channels. Then they typically pay $2 extra for each cable channel added.
So for example if I wanted Syfy plus TNT, I would pay $14 a month for a total of ~27 channels (my local market). It's a big savings over paying $60 for 70 channels.
Really? "Yes I would have signed the NDAA." - Romney in debate
>>>the value of questioning government
I've never heard him say anything against doing this. On the other hand I've never heard him saying anything for it either. Romney's stance on things is often an enigma (like Obama 2008).
56k modem at only 1200 bps? When has that ever happened? Even in my most-noisy environments, where I could literally hear static on the line, my 56k modem connected at 19000 or 24000 bps..... which is the top speed of the Trailblazer Plus. So basically identical.
Also the drawback of Trailblazer is a fast download rate (great for a Fido or Usenet BBS getting the latest messages off the nodes), but a very slow upload speed of just ~300 bps.
BTW I wrote large chunks of that wiki-article. If you look higher you'll see the Trailblazer being discussed.
I wrote large chunks of that wiki article, so it's accuracy may be deficient.;-) re: Baud versus bitrate. They are almost never the same, since baud == symbols/second and each symbol can carry 2, 4, 8 bits. That's why a 9600 bps modem is actually only 2400 baud (symbols/second). The fastest analog modem peaks at only ~3200 baud but streams at 33600 bps.
I used the world's first graphical service called Quantum Link (today called AOL). It was born in 1985 and took advantage of the Commodore 64's built-in graphics characters to draw pictures on your screen. Like a lo-res 320x200 version of the web.
Also I used Fidonet and Usenet through the generosity of local BBS owners (they paid the long-distance bills and the users got free daily messages from around the world). Some of my 80s-era posts are still on google today .
There's a reason out of thousands of innate natural rights, the Founding Fathers decided to include guns as one of the top 10. No not for hunting. For self-defense. Both of yourself and your fellow compatriots.
We haven't hit that stage yet, but we're getting very very close. If they start rounding-up Americans and throwing them in jail without trial (NDAA), I'm running for office. I'm fed up. And if they start executing americans.....
Let's just say the 2nd amendment is the only right left that I have not exercised. But that will change. Time to follow the example of our fellow human beings in Egypt. Libya. Eastern Europe. And the original 14 states (including Vermont).
They were 51 minutes in the 60s (like Star Trek), 46 minutes in the 80s/90s (A-Team, Quantum Leap, X-files) and 43 minutes by 2000 (Voyager/Enterprise/Lost - yes those were network shows).
On the flip side, modern shows severely edit the intro and exit credits. Look at the typical intro of CSI or Terra Nova. It's barely 15 seconds. In the days of the original Trek the intro was 1.5 minutes. (And 45 seconds for exit credits, while today's shows zip through the credits in 5-10 seconds.)
So the net result is that the overall modern episode is 8 minutes shorter than the 60s-era Trek, but the actual story content without credits is about the same. 48.5 minutes for TOS versus 42.5 minutes for a modern show.
>>>>>> The show creators compensate for the shorter run time by eliminating the 1.5 minute intros and 0.5 minute credits >> >>No they don't.
Yeah they do. Look at the typical intro of CSI or Terra Nova. It's barely 10 seconds. In the days of the original Trek the intro was 1.5 minutes. (And 45 seconds for exit credits, while today's shows zip through the credits in 5-10 seconds.)
ANYWAY: The point I was making is that shows have shortened over time. They were 51 minutes in the 60s (like Star Trek), 46 minutes in the 80s/90s (A-Team, Quantum Leap, X-files) and 43 minutes by 2000 (Voyager/Enterprise/Lost - yes those were network shows).
The point I was making is that shows have shortened over time. They were 51 minutes in the 60s (like Star Trek), 46 minutes in the 80s and most of the 90s (A-Team, Quantum Leap, X-files), and 43 minutes by 2000 (Voyager/Enterprise - yes those were network shows).
But no. Instead you'd rather act like the proto-typical pimply-faced Trekkie/Comic Book Guy and bitch, bitch, bitch at aother people. "Get a life!" - Bill Shatner.
>>>There's absolutely nothing in the Constitution about "natural things".
Yes there is. The 10th. Congress shall exercise no power it has not been granted. Congress does not have the power to ban natural things (or any thing). Said power is reserved to the States and the People.
As for a new Constitution, it would end-up being 500 pages long like the EU Constitution (lisbon treaty), and it would serve to give government MORE power not less. Drafting a new constitution would make us little more than serfs to the bureaucrats/technocrats. (See modern day Greece and Italy for example.)
>>>I don't think porn should be banned outright, but to call it "speech" is ridiculous. To call it "the press" is even moreso
Well then read the 9th and 10th amendment. 9 - The enumeration of certain rights shall not be construed to deny the People of other rights (such as the right to pronographic entertainment).
10 - Congress shall exercise no power that has not been granted to it. It does not hold the power to ban things (such as porn). Said power is reserved to the States and the People.
I figured it was some kind of Organic LED but didn't really care what the AM part meant. It shows pictures == I'm happy.
Aside - Why do DVDs look like crap on LED flat panels, but greats on my CRT? I've never been able to figure that out. Maybe it's poor scaling in the LED.
Congress shall make no law limiting the freedom of speech, or of the press..... Frothy Santorum can say whatever he wants, but he is not above the Supreme Law of the land.
Same with marijuana and alcohol. Even though I personally think both are destructive, I'd never ban these products. I would have opposed Prohibition in the 1920s, and I oppose it now too. (Besides it's unconstitutional - Congress does not have the authority to ban natural things.)
So are cars (accidents create widows), jobs (long hours == annoyed wife), lack of jobs (husband annoyed because he thinks nonworking wife is lazy), children (lack of sex), TV (one spouse feels ignored), internet (ditto), books (ditto), gambling (wastes money), stores (spouse blows thousands of dollars).
Maybe we should just ban EVERYTHING that harms marriages.
Or we could take the more logical course and say, "With great freedom comes great responsibility. The government will not protect you from your own bad choices in life. You work too much, spend too much, have car wrecks, or view too much porn, youtube, TV, and your marriage fails. That's your own dumb fault." i.e. The path that was originally laid out for us in 1789.
I went through and unsubscribed from all my newsletters, plus clicking on the little "unsubscribe me" on various advertising, but it made little difference. I still get about 25 emails a day that I do not want.
I don't like videos for the reason another person said --- takes longer than just skimming the text. Also I don't have a fast internet connection, and I'm typically downloading movies/TV shows in the background, so I don't want the overhead of a streaming video slowing things down.
Another thing I don't like is the URL games.slashdot.org. Why? Because my workplace blocks it. (I suspect the same sad fact is true for many of/.'s readers.) Changing it to something else would be appreciated. Maybe entertainment.slashdot.org?
Firefox 4 gradually grows from 90 to 200 meg of RAM (forcing me to exit and restart). From what I've heard later versions like Firefox 10/LTS are even bigger memory hogs.
>>>That only makes more sense if you think that the rest of the world will not be able to transition away from coal/oil in a meaningful way until after the Mideast runs out
They won't.
India and China are gobbling up oil faster than the U.S. is, and there's no indication they have replacements. The Mideast & Siberian wells will run dry in mere decades, which will leave the U.S. and Canada with the only supply of oil/coal in the world (if we save them rather than squander them). We'll be rich.
Slashdot Mirror
Ditto.
My antenna gives me 40+ channels*. Hulu gives me the various cable shows (mostly Syfy stuff). Comcast can go suck it. ;-)
*
* abc, cbs, nbc, fox, cw, myNetworkTV, ion, univision, telmundo, telefutura, 24 hours news, RT, France24, NHK, PBS 1,2,3,4 (various documentary/education channels), Life, Wellness, Qubo, thisTV (oldmovies), Retro (70s/80s shows), AntennaTV (50s/60s), coolTV (musicvideos), Trinity, SmileofaChild, JCTV, Enlace, ChurchChannel, a channel that plays nothing but old synidicated shows (Xena, Hercules, Davinci, Trek, SG1), and a bunch of other channels I've forgotten.
My favorite channels are the Retro ones plus movies plus RT or France24 for news. And the Top 5 broadcast networks.
Funny how A la carte works in the U.S. but for some reason can't work in Canada.
There are a few city and county governments that mandate a la carte be an option. The customer pays a flat rate of ~$10 which incudes all the free shopping and broadcast channels. Then they typically pay $2 extra for each cable channel added.
So for example if I wanted Syfy plus TNT, I would pay $14 a month for a total of ~27 channels (my local market). It's a big savings over paying $60 for 70 channels.
>>>an impassioned defense of human rights
Really? "Yes I would have signed the NDAA." - Romney in debate
>>>the value of questioning government
I've never heard him say anything against doing this. On the other hand I've never heard him saying anything for it either. Romney's stance on things is often an enigma (like Obama 2008).
>>>We're still assassinating people
Bush assasinated americans? I know he's an ass, but I don't recall that one.
>>>I didn't know Romney had a /. account
Which one is Romney? The current sitting president or the candidate for president? They all look alike to me.
56k modem at only 1200 bps? When has that ever happened? Even in my most-noisy environments, where I could literally hear static on the line, my 56k modem connected at 19000 or 24000 bps..... which is the top speed of the Trailblazer Plus. So basically identical.
Also the drawback of Trailblazer is a fast download rate (great for a Fido or Usenet BBS getting the latest messages off the nodes), but a very slow upload speed of just ~300 bps.
BTW I wrote large chunks of that wiki-article. If you look higher you'll see the Trailblazer being discussed.
I wrote large chunks of that wiki article, so it's accuracy may be deficient. ;-) re: Baud versus bitrate. They are almost never the same, since baud == symbols/second and each symbol can carry 2, 4, 8 bits. That's why a 9600 bps modem is actually only 2400 baud (symbols/second). The fastest analog modem peaks at only ~3200 baud but streams at 33600 bps.
I used the world's first graphical service called Quantum Link (today called AOL). It was born in 1985 and took advantage of the Commodore 64's built-in graphics characters to draw pictures on your screen. Like a lo-res 320x200 version of the web.
Also I used Fidonet and Usenet through the generosity of local BBS owners (they paid the long-distance bills and the users got free daily messages from around the world). Some of my 80s-era posts are still on google today
.
There's a reason out of thousands of innate natural rights, the Founding Fathers decided to include guns as one of the top 10. No not for hunting. For self-defense. Both of yourself and your fellow compatriots.
We haven't hit that stage yet, but we're getting very very close. If they start rounding-up Americans and throwing them in jail without trial (NDAA), I'm running for office. I'm fed up. And if they start executing americans.....
Let's just say the 2nd amendment is the only right left that I have not exercised. But that will change. Time to follow the example of our fellow human beings in Egypt. Libya. Eastern Europe. And the original 14 states (including Vermont).
They were 51 minutes in the 60s (like Star Trek),
46 minutes in the 80s/90s (A-Team, Quantum Leap, X-files)
and 43 minutes by 2000 (Voyager/Enterprise/Lost - yes those were network shows).
On the flip side, modern shows severely edit the intro and exit credits. Look at the typical intro of CSI or Terra Nova. It's barely 15 seconds. In the days of the original Trek the intro was 1.5 minutes. (And 45 seconds for exit credits, while today's shows zip through the credits in 5-10 seconds.)
So the net result is that the overall modern episode is 8 minutes shorter than the 60s-era Trek, but the actual story content without credits is about the same. 48.5 minutes for TOS versus 42.5 minutes for a modern show.
>>>I thought Seamonkey was discontinued in 2009??
Hardly.
You're probably thinking of Netscape.
>>>>>> The show creators compensate for the shorter run time by eliminating the 1.5 minute intros and 0.5 minute credits
>>
>>No they don't.
Yeah they do. Look at the typical intro of CSI or Terra Nova. It's barely 10 seconds. In the days of the original Trek the intro was 1.5 minutes. (And 45 seconds for exit credits, while today's shows zip through the credits in 5-10 seconds.)
ANYWAY: The point I was making is that shows have shortened over time.
They were 51 minutes in the 60s (like Star Trek),
46 minutes in the 80s/90s (A-Team, Quantum Leap, X-files)
and 43 minutes by 2000 (Voyager/Enterprise/Lost - yes those were network shows).
>>>China is about to run into a crisis where the elderly generation expects to be supported by a younger generation half its size.
No crisis there.
China doesn't have social security or other handouts. They just let their old people die.
Whoosh.
The point I was making is that shows have shortened over time. They were 51 minutes in the 60s (like Star Trek), 46 minutes in the 80s and most of the 90s (A-Team, Quantum Leap, X-files), and 43 minutes by 2000 (Voyager/Enterprise - yes those were network shows).
But no. Instead you'd rather act like the proto-typical pimply-faced Trekkie/Comic Book Guy and bitch, bitch, bitch at aother people. "Get a life!" - Bill Shatner.
>>>Or upgrade your computer. Ram is cheap with 2 gigs of ddr 3 costing like $29 or something silly.
The laptop is already maxed-out at 1/3rd gig.
>>>There's absolutely nothing in the Constitution about "natural things".
Yes there is. The 10th. Congress shall exercise no power it has not been granted. Congress does not have the power to ban natural things (or any thing). Said power is reserved to the States and the People.
As for a new Constitution, it would end-up being 500 pages long like the EU Constitution (lisbon treaty), and it would serve to give government MORE power not less. Drafting a new constitution would make us little more than serfs to the bureaucrats/technocrats. (See modern day Greece and Italy for example.)
>>>I don't think porn should be banned outright, but to call it "speech" is ridiculous. To call it "the press" is even moreso
Well then read the 9th and 10th amendment.
9 - The enumeration of certain rights shall not be construed to deny the People of other rights (such as the right to pronographic entertainment).
10 - Congress shall exercise no power that has not been granted to it. It does not hold the power to ban things (such as porn). Said power is reserved to the States and the People.
I figured it was some kind of Organic LED but didn't really care what the AM part meant. It shows pictures == I'm happy.
Aside - Why do DVDs look like crap on LED flat panels, but greats on my CRT? I've never been able to figure that out. Maybe it's poor scaling in the LED.
Congress shall make no law limiting the freedom of speech, or of the press..... Frothy Santorum can say whatever he wants, but he is not above the Supreme Law of the land.
Same with marijuana and alcohol. Even though I personally think both are destructive, I'd never ban these products. I would have opposed Prohibition in the 1920s, and I oppose it now too. (Besides it's unconstitutional - Congress does not have the authority to ban natural things.)
So are cars (accidents create widows), jobs (long hours == annoyed wife), lack of jobs (husband annoyed because he thinks nonworking wife is lazy), children (lack of sex), TV (one spouse feels ignored), internet (ditto), books (ditto), gambling (wastes money), stores (spouse blows thousands of dollars).
Maybe we should just ban EVERYTHING that harms marriages.
Or we could take the more logical course and say, "With great freedom comes great responsibility. The government will not protect you from your own bad choices in life. You work too much, spend too much, have car wrecks, or view too much porn, youtube, TV, and your marriage fails. That's your own dumb fault." i.e. The path that was originally laid out for us in 1789.
I went through and unsubscribed from all my newsletters, plus clicking on the little "unsubscribe me" on various advertising, but it made little difference. I still get about 25 emails a day that I do not want.
Mr. Sherlock:
No shit. ;-)
I don't like videos for the reason another person said --- takes longer than just skimming the text. Also I don't have a fast internet connection, and I'm typically downloading movies/TV shows in the background, so I don't want the overhead of a streaming video slowing things down.
Another thing I don't like is the URL games.slashdot.org. Why? Because my workplace blocks it. (I suspect the same sad fact is true for many of /.'s readers.) Changing it to something else would be appreciated. Maybe entertainment.slashdot.org?
No interest in the videos; would rather read about technology vs. watching it.
Firefox 4 gradually grows from 90 to 200 meg of RAM (forcing me to exit and restart). From what I've heard later versions like Firefox 10/LTS are even bigger memory hogs.
>>>That only makes more sense if you think that the rest of the world will not be able to transition away from coal/oil in a meaningful way until after the Mideast runs out
They won't.
India and China are gobbling up oil faster than the U.S. is, and there's no indication they have replacements. The Mideast & Siberian wells will run dry in mere decades, which will leave the U.S. and Canada with the only supply of oil/coal in the world (if we save them rather than squander them). We'll be rich.