You are either completely ignorant of what you're talking about or a very well spoken Troll, or perhaps I've completely misunderstood you, I'm not honestly sure which, so I'll bite.
However, the whole idea that P2P is at all different than server-to-server is ridiculous. Just TRY to set up a P2P connection on the net without going through an ISP
P2P is very very different from server/client based communications for a couple different reasons.
In a client/server based model, you have servers providing data and clients requesting data, requests for data (searches) go from the client to a known point which returns what it has.
In a P2P model, you send a search request to all the nodes you are connected to, they respond and each forward the request to each node they're connected to, ad ridiculam. If you've studied even basic mathematics you can see that this is exponential growth, and the amount of packets flying around for a single search request gets very large very quickly. Ever watch the search monitor on Gnutella, realize that there's a packet being sent across your pipe for each one of those, and etc. etc.
Another problem for P2P vs. client/server in terms of bandwidth is that DNS (the means by which you locat your server) is a centralized system. Making other hosts on a P2P network aware of your presence requires broadcast announcements, PING/PONG, and the same exponential nonsense applies as before (within reason).
P2P is nothing new, and it is nothing 'different' than what has always been done. Servers talk to each other as 'peers' too, don't they?
Yes, in its current incarnation, it is very new, and no, servers generally don't.:)
This presumption that emails are equivalent to official memos from the plaintiffs, which they saw as a misuse of the entrepreneur. However, under no circumstances shall any employee of the article claims a lot of unnecassary exceptions, and some inefficient device emulation out of business by pulling a bait-and-switch, doesn't look like the bad guys. Therefore, we must clean up our act, both public and private, and be willing to address the real, underlying concerns of our fellow consumers' mistrust and cynicism to the DeCSS link. This would have had to use ONLY industry standard, open memory formats such as crossbows, gunpowder, and chemical explosives. While Elven magic was still prevalent, the Dwarves had no reason to do it - the reviewer opinion notwithstanding, buy Ramus book and let the people that buy his films with his copy is his business.
Finally, you observe:
Get all the heavy hitters with PhDs and post-doctoral work to defend them calmly, though). As soon as the person in front of you in limiting access to information and communication-- a dream for anyone to peruse. He obviously is incapable of decency, integrity, or intelligence. Where's natural selection when you download directly from them, there's a Linux software available...that gets the nod over VMware or Win4Lin. If it's enabled by default. Not only do I not trust the langauges, but the pay-per-use annoyance-ware model has not yet died. Witness the recent Slashdot story about the struggle with darkness within (which is naturally why so many people are instructed to send too much energy up- the intensity of the key point (to me) proving that is harmful to minors. If you are *really* worried about inetd's security, why not have it, download it now!
Apparently you underestimate the power of high quality animation to the life of a modern geek.
er, unless this Disney film contains long sequences of 13 year old schoolgirls fucking large pink tentacles, i don't think it falls within the range of animation typically enjoyed by your everyday, household g33k.
i equate this with an announcement about The Little Mermaid...
The number of hours spent accumulates linearly, quite obviously. The amount of good code written does not accumulate linearly, but that's (rather obviously) a much different metric.
HTML formatting cut out my < in the for loop. oops...
I'd rather have BeOS being developed by paid professionals than by a bunch of whining open-sourcers.
Sounds like someone's awful frightened about job security...
Look how far EVERY closed-source OS has come without the help of the open-source community.
Yeah. Windoze. Hooooo-wie! What an OS! Thank god those "whining open sourcers" didn't get their hands on it, think how unstable, unusable, and counter-intuitive it would be then!
Do you really give a shit about seeing and understanding the source code, or do you just want to get BeOS for free?
Personally, both. Be's API is fscking beautiful, I'd love to get my hands under the hood. Furthermore, give it to me for free god damn it, throw in a car too. You know us open-sourcers are just freeloading whippersnappers looking for a free ride (or beer). We're not in it for anything else but a handout.
It's pretty arrogant to think that the hour you spend programming at night is going to improve the OS...
Let's see:
for(i=0;iMAXCODERS;i++){ hoursSpent+=1; }
hmmm.....
alterego (I got bored with the 82 karma account...)
I just asked a friend of mine at a Tier 1 ISP what a T3 usually goes for, and he said it depends on how much you can schmooze the sales guy, but typically they go for anywhere between $30K and $40K...
Apparently the technology has advanced since I last saw it:)
At the conference I was at, they were pushing Microwave for ~2Mbps at up to 5 or 6 miles when direct line of sight was available, and some kind of infrared for when direct line of sight wasn't (i.e. the infrared transmitters could go through buildings).
Shorter wavelengths are better than longer for travelling through objects and over long distances (line of sight). Remember your 900Mhz cordless phone, now pushing up to the 2.4 Ghz range? The reason behind that is farther transmission with less interference.
Perhaps my understanding of this whole concept is fundamentally flawed? High frequency=short wavelength, I'm positive of that. Low frequency waves are more of the type to pierce solid objects, I ?think. Any input anyone?
As to the ISP you mentioned, did they use directional (parabolic) antennas?
They used directional (parabolic) antennas, and had direct line of sight, i.e. they didn't go over the horizon. One of the owners of the ISP was lucky enough to own some property on the right side of a large hill just on one side of the border, I believe we set the other dish up on the roof of the building a mile or two away.
I think your T1 estimate's a little off, last I checked a (cheap) full T1 was going for ~$1000/month, perhaps slightly less. That's a whole fuckofalotta bandwidth 'though, 1.544 Mbits. A T1 actually consists of 24 channels each capable of 64Kbits.
T3's are (contrary to apparently popular belief) not 3 T1s, but actually 28 T1s, or 672 channels each running at 64Kbits. They are correspondingly a buttload more money. I can't find a price quoted *anywhere*, it appears to be one of those "call us" things:)
One of the unfortunate drawbacks to high-speed wireless data transmission, especially in the 10mbps range, is the tradeoff of frequency vs. transmission range. (I'm pulling this all from memory of a conference I attended on wireless data transmission, please correct me if I'm wrong). The problem is that high bandwidth wireless pipes (microwave) require very high transmission frequencies, typically in the 2.x GHz range IIRC. Waveforms with high frequencies have short wavelength, and therefore do not travel far, or through objects (in the same way that you can hear the bass from your neighbor's stereo, but not the treble).
Unless this technology has advanced substantially in recent years, most microwave transmitters require line-of-sight, and rarely transmit more than a few miles. An ISP I used to work for purchased a set of microwave transmitters to allow them to expand their business into a neighboring state without paying taxes and tarrifs on a leased line crossing state borders. The band these microwave transmitters use isn't retulated by the FCC, so transmission at those frequencies is open game. We had to set up the transmitters on opposite sides of the border (a few miles apart), and align them for line of sight. Even at a short range, we still only got E1 speeds (which I understand to be ~2mpbs).
Slashdot Mirror
You are either completely ignorant of what you're talking about or a very well spoken Troll, or perhaps I've completely misunderstood you, I'm not honestly sure which, so I'll bite.
However, the whole idea that P2P is at all different than server-to-server is ridiculous. Just TRY to set up a P2P connection on the net without going through an ISP
P2P is very very different from server/client based communications for a couple different reasons.
In a client/server based model, you have servers providing data and clients requesting data, requests for data (searches) go from the client to a known point which returns what it has.
In a P2P model, you send a search request to all the nodes you are connected to, they respond and each forward the request to each node they're connected to, ad ridiculam. If you've studied even basic mathematics you can see that this is exponential growth, and the amount of packets flying around for a single search request gets very large very quickly. Ever watch the search monitor on Gnutella, realize that there's a packet being sent across your pipe for each one of those, and etc. etc.
Another problem for P2P vs. client/server in terms of bandwidth is that DNS (the means by which you locat your server) is a centralized system. Making other hosts on a P2P network aware of your presence requires broadcast announcements, PING/PONG, and the same exponential nonsense applies as before (within reason).
P2P is nothing new, and it is nothing 'different' than what has always been done. Servers talk to each other as 'peers' too, don't they?
Yes, in its current incarnation, it is very new, and no, servers generally don't.
hope that helps to clear up the differences.
This presumption that emails are equivalent to official memos from the plaintiffs, which they saw as a misuse of the entrepreneur. However, under no circumstances shall any employee of the article claims a lot of unnecassary exceptions, and some inefficient device emulation out of business by pulling a bait-and-switch, doesn't look like the bad guys. Therefore, we must clean up our act, both public and private, and be willing to address the real, underlying concerns of our fellow consumers' mistrust and cynicism to the DeCSS link. This would have had to use ONLY industry standard, open memory formats such as crossbows, gunpowder, and chemical explosives. While Elven magic was still prevalent, the Dwarves had no reason to do it - the reviewer opinion notwithstanding, buy Ramus book and let the people that buy his films with his copy is his business.
Finally, you observe:
Get all the heavy hitters with PhDs and post-doctoral work to defend them calmly, though). As soon as the person in front of you in limiting access to information and communication-- a dream for anyone to peruse. He obviously is incapable of decency, integrity, or intelligence. Where's natural selection when you download directly from them, there's a Linux software available...that gets the nod over VMware or Win4Lin. If it's enabled by default. Not only do I not trust the langauges, but the pay-per-use annoyance-ware model has not yet died. Witness the recent Slashdot story about the struggle with darkness within (which is naturally why so many people are instructed to send too much energy up- the intensity of the key point (to me) proving that is harmful to minors. If you are *really* worried about inetd's security, why not have it, download it now!
Apparently you underestimate the power of high quality animation to the life of a modern geek.
er, unless this Disney film contains long sequences of 13 year old schoolgirls fucking large pink tentacles, i don't think it falls within the range of animation typically enjoyed by your everyday, household g33k.
i equate this with an announcement about The Little Mermaid...
there goes my k4rm4.
The number of hours spent accumulates linearly, quite obviously. The amount of good code written does not accumulate linearly, but that's (rather obviously) a much different metric.
HTML formatting cut out my < in the for loop. oops...
alterego
I need to vent, I'll reply anyway...
I'd rather have BeOS being developed by paid professionals than by a bunch of whining open-sourcers.
Sounds like someone's awful frightened about job security...
Look how far EVERY closed-source OS has come without the help of the open-source community.
Yeah. Windoze. Hooooo-wie! What an OS! Thank god those "whining open sourcers" didn't get their hands on it, think how unstable, unusable, and counter-intuitive it would be then!
Do you really give a shit about seeing
and understanding the source code, or do you just want to get BeOS for free?
Personally, both. Be's API is fscking beautiful, I'd love to get my hands under the hood. Furthermore, give it to me for free god damn it, throw in a car too. You know us open-sourcers are just freeloading whippersnappers looking for a free ride (or beer). We're not in it for anything else but a handout.
It's pretty arrogant to think that the hour you spend programming at night is going to improve the OS...
Let's see:
for(i=0;iMAXCODERS;i++){
hoursSpent+=1;
}
hmmm.....
alterego
(I got bored with the 82 karma account...)
I just asked a friend of mine at a Tier 1 ISP what a T3 usually goes for, and he said it depends on how much you can schmooze the sales guy, but typically they go for anywhere between $30K and $40K...
alt3r3go
Apparently the technology has advanced since I last saw it :)
At the conference I was at, they were pushing Microwave for ~2Mbps at up to 5 or 6 miles when direct line of sight was available, and some kind of infrared for when direct line of sight wasn't (i.e. the infrared transmitters could go through buildings).
Shorter wavelengths are better than longer for travelling through objects and over long distances (line of sight). Remember your 900Mhz cordless phone, now pushing up to the 2.4 Ghz range? The reason behind that is farther transmission with less interference.
Perhaps my understanding of this whole concept is fundamentally flawed? High frequency=short wavelength, I'm positive of that. Low frequency waves are more of the type to pierce solid objects, I ?think. Any input anyone?
As to the ISP you mentioned, did they use directional (parabolic) antennas?
They used directional (parabolic) antennas, and had direct line of sight, i.e. they didn't go over the horizon. One of the owners of the ISP was lucky enough to own some property on the right side of a large hill just on one side of the border, I believe we set the other dish up on the roof of the building a mile or two away.
alt3r3go
I think your T1 estimate's a little off, last I checked a (cheap) full T1 was going for ~$1000/month, perhaps slightly less. That's a whole fuckofalotta bandwidth 'though, 1.544 Mbits. A T1 actually consists of 24 channels each capable of 64Kbits.
:)
T3's are (contrary to apparently popular belief) not 3 T1s, but actually 28 T1s, or 672 channels each running at 64Kbits. They are correspondingly a buttload more money. I can't find a price quoted *anywhere*, it appears to be one of those "call us" things
alt3r3go
One of the unfortunate drawbacks to high-speed wireless data transmission, especially in the 10mbps range, is the tradeoff of frequency vs. transmission range. (I'm pulling this all from memory of a conference I attended on wireless data transmission, please correct me if I'm wrong). The problem is that high bandwidth wireless pipes (microwave) require very high transmission frequencies, typically in the 2.x GHz range IIRC. Waveforms with high frequencies have short wavelength, and therefore do not travel far, or through objects (in the same way that you can hear the bass from your neighbor's stereo, but not the treble).
Unless this technology has advanced substantially in recent years, most microwave transmitters require line-of-sight, and rarely transmit more than a few miles. An ISP I used to work for purchased a set of microwave transmitters to allow them to expand their business into a neighboring state without paying taxes and tarrifs on a leased line crossing state borders. The band these microwave transmitters use isn't retulated by the FCC, so transmission at those frequencies is open game. We had to set up the transmitters on opposite sides of the border (a few miles apart), and align them for line of sight. Even at a short range, we still only got E1 speeds (which I understand to be ~2mpbs).
alt3r3go