Business is not the most efficient way to do certain things today. The for-profit fire departments were a mess, and only ensured that fires could rage unchecked through most of the neighborhood. The CDC would, for similar reasons, be a mess for-profit. Roadways, police force, animal control, these are all services that are better and more cheaply served by blanket coverage.
Oh, yes, WiFi-coverage is just like fire departments... No, wait, it is more like animal control. Oh, I know, it is like subsidized housing! Uhmm, never mind...
And I -- as I drive through your city -- don't want the city's cop looking through my laptop: "I'm sorry, sir, but we had some heavy network abuse recently and are checking everybody's equipment now."
Ever tried uncapping your Cable router? Wonder who comes to your door?
I never tried to uncap a "Cable router" (whatever that is), nor have I ever abused a network. The hypothetical cop would harrass me in the latter case anyway, but not in the former. Oops...
The telcos have been broken up for years. Alternative DSL companies were attempting to compete with the people who owned the wires, which are prohibitively expensive for all but a few companies to lay, and certainly prohibitively expensive to double-cover most areas.
Now if only you could realize, who "the people who owned the wires" are... You'd then realize, the telcos weren't really broken up...
But how would bringing a large potential bargaining chip to the table cost more and give less?
Anything funded through taxes ends up costing (much) more, than originally thought. From foreign wars (the first reason for Income Tax) to highways to AT&T (indirectly) to Boston's Big Dig.
Businessmen are, on average, much smarter than politicians and officials (because they are paid better). They'll find their way and pass the cost of having to find it on to the consumer.
Add the outright crooks attracted to piles of money in control of the predominantly dimwitted city officials and the potential for waste (and worse) is glaringly obvious. NYC's garbage collectors are, probably, the most infamous example with the same city's roadway construction companies being the close second.
500 dollars a month, with a 2,000 dollar install charge? Who is willing to take that risk? Who is socially networked enough to know that many people who need internet access.
What? Is not the whole thread about hundreds of people waiting for years for broadband Internet access? Did we -- by a slip of a tongue/finger -- just arrive to the underlying truth of the matter? That there aren't really that many people, who want this? And if 2000 is what the setup costs, than somebody has to pay it.
As for your numbers, the satelite TV was quite pricey too, but there are plenty of BIG, earlier generation antennae in the country side...
It's cute, though, that you find a way to blame one of the failings of the market on government intervention from a generation ago.
It is rather ugly, that you blame the market for having difficulties overcoming the failure of government's intervention a generation ago...
Just don't do it inside a government.
Why not? It's ostensibly actually there to serve your needs. Sure, you could setup a non-profit collective of concerned citizens, but then you lose the bargaining power a municipality offers.
I lived in different municipalities in this country, and I'm yet to see a case, where municipality's arm-twisting power was used for anything good. And the bigger the municipality, the worse it gets (despite the increase in the said power).
At least, "collective" is better than municipal, because it is not compulsory...
That is true, unless the community is not being served by any of the existing businesses. If a telco refuses to enter a market because it has bigger fish to fry, it is perfectly acceptable for government to step in to fill the need.
No, it is not. They should invite and encourage companies to do it, but can not do it themselves. Yours is a seductive line of thinking, but it is wrong. Cities are not going to force people to work on this -- they plan to pay them with taxpayers' money. And if there are enough people in a city to operate a service (any service), they should be doing it as a business and be paid directly by their users. This is how this country operates and is the most efficient way known today.
You don't want the city council to decide, which sites ought to blocked and how much bandwidth each citizen ought to be limited to. And the people, who'll never use this service wouldn't want to pay for it. And I -- as I drive through your city -- don't want the city's cop looking through my laptop: "I'm sorry, sir, but we had some heavy network abuse recently and are checking everybody's equipment now."
But as most of the people in these areas have been waiting for years for coverage maps to bother with them, it seems perfectly acceptable for localities to choose to pick up the slack.
The wait is the result of the government's earlier "initiatives" of offering telcos and cable companies monopolies over certain areas. Bodies of various would-be broadband providers are covering the battlefields of their wars with government-created incumbents (Verizon, Comcast).
The solution is not more of the same... You had to "wait for years" and decided to do it yourself. Great! Just don't do it inside a government.
SpeakEasy, for example, allows, nay, encourages you to share your Internet connection (wirelessly or otherwise). They'll even do the billing for you (you specify the rate starting at $5 per month). You may not be able to get DSL in a small city, but you can get a T1 and share it with neighbors. And if you think, that will be expensive, know, that paying for it with taxes would cost more and get you less.
Wireless is a bit harder to justify as a good-for-everyone deal. But what if a city decided to set up wireless points and ask the users to pay for it rather than doing it with their taxes?
For the same reason, a city is can't "decide" to go into any business. It just doesn't belong there -- as setiathome doesn't belong in kernel.
I don't think the optimization you speak of will work.
It actually works already. Get yourself Intel's or Sun's (for Solaris) compiler and see for yourself.
What happens if the code in the loop changes the value of
i?
A fairly trivial problem given today's state of the art and science of compiler design. I trust, gcc will have this optimization soon too -- if it does not already.
Also compiler errs on the safe side, but there is a standard called OpenMP,
which specifies compiler pragmas, with which you can assure the compiler, that certain things can be parallelized, even when it is not obvious to it.
When you have to get all your groceries checked out even 1 in 10 times, it defeats the convenience of self scanning.
Actually, it does not -- if there is no wait for the self-scan, but a few people wait to the regular registers.
But even you should admit, that even purple rag-dressed females benefit from not having to wait for those white business-attired males. Those guys zoom through the self-scan lines, shortening the wait for the others.
Can't it be a happy (heterosexual even) marriage? With both partners alternating at the "dominant" role -- in bedroom, as well as and in guestroom and kitchen?
Actress Scarlett Johansson has trouble with the technical jargon and tosses up her hands as she reads a telaprompter in the back of the room during the ceremony Scientific and Technical Awards banquet.
I wonder, is it supposed to be "tell-a-prompter" or "teleprompter"?..
Today one can not find BSDi among WindRiver's products (it used to be there just recently, according to Google, though), and customers in need of support for their earlier bought licenses are requested to contactBSDMall instead.
Most New Yorkers ignored the RNC and the protests, too.
Revising history? The whole Manhattan was in a frenzy. Going across it in daytime, one was bound to hit at least one demonstration, normally -- two. If that's "ignoring", I don't know, what "reacting" is...
France is not the beacon of anyone.
Talking to a Left-leaning person, France will come up as one of the "successfull" alternative models of society. With three of four different communist parties, how can it not be a beacon:-) ?
The left fails to hate France, simply refraining from jingoist sentiments spewed by neoconservatives.
Jingoist? It is not jingoist -- it is quite normal to dislike people, that dislike you. 88% of the French (according to the latest poll) dislike our president. Are those of us, who like him (not you, I know), not justified in their feeling of resentment? How is that chauvinism/jingoism and not a normal reaction? Especially, considering the red carpet rolled out by the same French for a much more evil (here we agree, I hope) Chinese leader.
you are obviously a partisan ass
The usual... Out of steam, down to insults... Remember to logout, loser.
I guess you never heard of the whole "Free Tibet" thing, or those protests over allowing China into the WTO over their human rights record?
Oh, yes, I have heard of them...
I'm also seeing Falun Gong members being routinely ignored by Manhattanites -- the same ones, who went into a frenzy over Republican convention.
Most importantly, however, I read regularly about France -- that beacon of the Left -- lobbying hard for lifting EU's ban on arms sales to China. Can forget about Chirac's (man second only to Hugo Chavez in the amount of Left's admiration) constant talk about the need for "multipolar world". I'm not even sure, he is glad USSR is no more, if he seeks to replace it with China so soon.
If you really believe what you say, then start boycotting Chinese products. You'll soon find your consumerist life empty because you can't get any electronics product, period.
"My consumerist life"? Aren't we being just a bit presumptious here in extrapolating respect for Bush and condemnation of Che Guevara into living a "consumerist life" (whatever that means)?.. I do boycot Chinese product actualy. I do it practically -- I refuse to buy China-made, unless there is nothing else in the category, that I'm shopping for -- whatever the price. Salespeople think, I'm "patriotic" or quality-consious...
We foam at Bush because we know the only difference between China and the US is the ACLU
What, even the presence of Clinton and Dean don't make a difference? Joking...
No. I hinted at the difference in my original post (Score 1. Insightful). The capitalism in US (and some other countries) is rooted in the idea of personal freedom. In China it is planted into the unfree society only as a more efficient way of doing things.
I have no doubt that if he [Bush -mi] felt he could lead a successful coup d'etat, he would.
Really? You mean, like Castro and his top henchman Comrade Che did? I wonder how you (personally) feel about Hugo Chavez, who broke both (old and new) of his country's Constitutions in his grab for more power... Did not prevent him from being an honor speaker at the World Social Forum, though. That despite him claiming Bolivar (a very rich landowner) to be his personal hero even...
What's the difference between Che Guevara and a hugely successful CIA guerilla that we all sponsor with our tax dollars?
Very simple -- CIA fought Communism. The results may not always be perfect, but they are better than the alternative. Say what you want about Pinochet (CIA's success), but his rule resulted in far less blood than Castro's (despite Chile being a lot larger than Cuba -- CIA's failure) and today Chile has South America's strongest economy, while Cuba remains a dump (despite billions of dollars worth of past Soviet aid).
Worship one, you're a patriot; worship the other, and you're a traitor.
What's so surprising? CIA is part of America's government, while che guevaras are your country's sworn enemies -- "worshiping" them certainly makes you a traitor...
I dare say, we all hate bin Laden today, but your son/grandson may well be making a fashion statement with bin Laden's (or Zarqawi's) photo in his time of "youthful rebellion". After all, they resisted America, and that's a good thing, right?
Slashdot Mirror
Deal with it...
And if, indeed, 119 people read their own letters, what exactly is so dishonest or "trust breaching" about it?
Actually, I'd say, the school was not honest, if it delayed informing the applicants for over a month.
"Enemies of the People" were blamed for everything too...
The artificial muscles will, likely, become 10 or 100 times stronger 5-10 years from now.
Oh, yes, WiFi-coverage is just like fire departments... No, wait, it is more like animal control. Oh, I know, it is like subsidized housing! Uhmm, never mind...
I never tried to uncap a "Cable router" (whatever that is), nor have I ever abused a network. The hypothetical cop would harrass me in the latter case anyway, but not in the former. Oops...
Now if only you could realize, who "the people who owned the wires" are... You'd then realize, the telcos weren't really broken up...
Anything funded through taxes ends up costing (much) more, than originally thought. From foreign wars (the first reason for Income Tax) to highways to AT&T (indirectly) to Boston's Big Dig.
Businessmen are, on average, much smarter than politicians and officials (because they are paid better). They'll find their way and pass the cost of having to find it on to the consumer.
Add the outright crooks attracted to piles of money in control of the predominantly dimwitted city officials and the potential for waste (and worse) is glaringly obvious. NYC's garbage collectors are, probably, the most infamous example with the same city's roadway construction companies being the close second.
What? Is not the whole thread about hundreds of people waiting for years for broadband Internet access? Did we -- by a slip of a tongue/finger -- just arrive to the underlying truth of the matter? That there aren't really that many people, who want this? And if 2000 is what the setup costs, than somebody has to pay it.
As for your numbers, the satelite TV was quite pricey too, but there are plenty of BIG, earlier generation antennae in the country side...
It is rather ugly, that you blame the market for having difficulties overcoming the failure of government's intervention a generation ago...
I lived in different municipalities in this country, and I'm yet to see a case, where municipality's arm-twisting power was used for anything good. And the bigger the municipality, the worse it gets (despite the increase in the said power).
At least, "collective" is better than municipal, because it is not compulsory...
No, it is not. They should invite and encourage companies to do it, but can not do it themselves. Yours is a seductive line of thinking, but it is wrong. Cities are not going to force people to work on this -- they plan to pay them with taxpayers' money. And if there are enough people in a city to operate a service (any service), they should be doing it as a business and be paid directly by their users. This is how this country operates and is the most efficient way known today.
You don't want the city council to decide, which sites ought to blocked and how much bandwidth each citizen ought to be limited to. And the people, who'll never use this service wouldn't want to pay for it. And I -- as I drive through your city -- don't want the city's cop looking through my laptop: "I'm sorry, sir, but we had some heavy network abuse recently and are checking everybody's equipment now."
The wait is the result of the government's earlier "initiatives" of offering telcos and cable companies monopolies over certain areas. Bodies of various would-be broadband providers are covering the battlefields of their wars with government-created incumbents (Verizon, Comcast).
The solution is not more of the same... You had to "wait for years" and decided to do it yourself. Great! Just don't do it inside a government.
SpeakEasy, for example, allows, nay, encourages you to share your Internet connection (wirelessly or otherwise). They'll even do the billing for you (you specify the rate starting at $5 per month). You may not be able to get DSL in a small city, but you can get a T1 and share it with neighbors. And if you think, that will be expensive, know, that paying for it with taxes would cost more and get you less.
For the same reason, a city is can't "decide" to go into any business. It just doesn't belong there -- as setiathome doesn't belong in kernel.
The mention of "the previous generation of activists" was particularly touching...
It actually works already. Get yourself Intel's or Sun's (for Solaris) compiler and see for yourself.
A fairly trivial problem given today's state of the art and science of compiler design. I trust, gcc will have this optimization soon too -- if it does not already.
Also compiler errs on the safe side, but there is a standard called OpenMP, which specifies compiler pragmas, with which you can assure the compiler, that certain things can be parallelized, even when it is not obvious to it.
Actually, it does not -- if there is no wait for the self-scan, but a few people wait to the regular registers.
But even you should admit, that even purple rag-dressed females benefit from not having to wait for those white business-attired males. Those guys zoom through the self-scan lines, shortening the wait for the others.
seems to be "fascinated" by the Columbine tragedy. Will Michael Moore be blamed?
Can't it be a happy (heterosexual even) marriage? With both partners alternating at the "dominant" role -- in bedroom, as well as and in guestroom and kitchen?
Even Soviet GULAGs allowed them (albeit, very rarely and only to spouses).
They should be a privilege, of course, to be -- like all other privileges -- denied as a punishment, when warranted...
"Growsing about rejected submissions" my behind -- I submitted a better worded snap with more informative links two days ago...
WinAmp has pulled the plug-in in question from their site, it seems...
He may also find room for Hubble's replacement there somewhere, and a way for it to be serviced at 10% (or 1%?) of the current prices...
The effects are waining but can still be felt...
Fortunately, they are based on a decent OS and, by opening the platform up to the developers, can appeal directly to users.
It will take a long while for cable-companies to offer anything comparable on their proprietary boxes.
Today one can not find BSDi among WindRiver's products (it used to be there just recently, according to Google, though), and customers in need of support for their earlier bought licenses are requested to contact BSDMall instead.
Is it worth making a FreeBSD port for this software?
Of course. But our perception allows for much longer delays in IM before we scream: "this sucks"...
Instant messengers (Yahoo!, AIM, MSN, etc.) are free and, most likely, are much easier for your contacts in US to install too.
Good luck!
Revising history? The whole Manhattan was in a frenzy. Going across it in daytime, one was bound to hit at least one demonstration, normally -- two. If that's "ignoring", I don't know, what "reacting" is...
Talking to a Left-leaning person, France will come up as one of the "successfull" alternative models of society. With three of four different communist parties, how can it not be a beacon :-) ?
Jingoist? It is not jingoist -- it is quite normal to dislike people, that dislike you. 88% of the French (according to the latest poll) dislike our president. Are those of us, who like him (not you, I know), not justified in their feeling of resentment? How is that chauvinism/jingoism and not a normal reaction? Especially, considering the red carpet rolled out by the same French for a much more evil (here we agree, I hope) Chinese leader.
The usual... Out of steam, down to insults... Remember to logout, loser.
Oh, yes, I have heard of them...
I'm also seeing Falun Gong members being routinely ignored by Manhattanites -- the same ones, who went into a frenzy over Republican convention.
Most importantly, however, I read regularly about France -- that beacon of the Left -- lobbying hard for lifting EU's ban on arms sales to China. Can forget about Chirac's (man second only to Hugo Chavez in the amount of Left's admiration) constant talk about the need for "multipolar world". I'm not even sure, he is glad USSR is no more, if he seeks to replace it with China so soon.
Are you?
"My consumerist life"? Aren't we being just a bit presumptious here in extrapolating respect for Bush and condemnation of Che Guevara into living a "consumerist life" (whatever that means)?.. I do boycot Chinese product actualy. I do it practically -- I refuse to buy China-made, unless there is nothing else in the category, that I'm shopping for -- whatever the price. Salespeople think, I'm "patriotic" or quality-consious...
What, even the presence of Clinton and Dean don't make a difference? Joking...
No. I hinted at the difference in my original post (Score 1. Insightful). The capitalism in US (and some other countries) is rooted in the idea of personal freedom. In China it is planted into the unfree society only as a more efficient way of doing things.
Really? You mean, like Castro and his top henchman Comrade Che did? I wonder how you (personally) feel about Hugo Chavez, who broke both (old and new) of his country's Constitutions in his grab for more power... Did not prevent him from being an honor speaker at the World Social Forum, though. That despite him claiming Bolivar (a very rich landowner) to be his personal hero even...
Very simple -- CIA fought Communism. The results may not always be perfect, but they are better than the alternative. Say what you want about Pinochet (CIA's success), but his rule resulted in far less blood than Castro's (despite Chile being a lot larger than Cuba -- CIA's failure) and today Chile has South America's strongest economy, while Cuba remains a dump (despite billions of dollars worth of past Soviet aid).
What's so surprising? CIA is part of America's government, while che guevaras are your country's sworn enemies -- "worshiping" them certainly makes you a traitor...
I dare say, we all hate bin Laden today, but your son/grandson may well be making a fashion statement with bin Laden's (or Zarqawi's) photo in his time of "youthful rebellion". After all, they resisted America, and that's a good thing, right?