I don't think we ever weren't good. I was just learning because what I learned in signals and systems did not jive with what you claimed. It turns out you and I were using latency differently.
We still have these things called public libraries, and subscriptions for residents are usually free.
Not where I live. For some reason, in my city they do not have a library and they don't participate with surrounding cities to provide access to theirs. I can go read a book there, but if I want to check something out I'll have to pay the yearly fee. Really sucks.
If you live in a democracy, you might want to lobby your city to change this stance. It'll make for a more desirable and livable city.
DRM is a publisher choice. It is a checkbox in the Amazon "publish my book" interface. All of my books sold through amazon are DRM free. If you want to know how to tell (since it is non-obvious)... under "product details" there is an item called "Simultaneous Device Usage" if that says "unlimited" it is DRM free.
If a book says unlimited, is the file actually DRM free, or is the DRM just permissive. Can a publisher, or Amazon, later change that number from unlimited to something more restrictive and push out the update to terms to devices just like they can push out deletion commands to devices?
My wife goes through 8-12 novels a month, and often the more recent ones are either not available from the local library or are checked out/reserved, so we're spending $40 or more on new or used books that generally get given away when she's done with them.
I solved a similar problem by time-shifting my reading a little. When I want to read a book, I reserve it at the library. When my place in line comes up, I read it. With a sufficiently flexible schedule I read everything I want to read, just not immediately. That's okay though because my reading list is long enough that I'm not without things to read.
Physically the speed of the signals going over the wire are the same, being electrical signals going over the same wires, but the 100 bytes go faster (and have lower latency) on the ADSL link because they get on and off the wire faster.
That's why I said it has little effect. I'm convinced that latency has a large effect on throughput but I am unconvinced that throughput has a large effect on latency. I get 16ms latency on my ADSL connection, which is 1.5Mb/s. I don't know anyone with 20+ Mb/s cable connections that has much lower latency than my connection. On the other hand, if you go to something like a 2400 baud modem then latencies are up noticeably.
So, am I misunderstanding? Gigabit fibre should have significantly better latency than a lowly 1.5Mb/s ADSL link? I am not sure it does (haven't tested one).
I did not realize you were specifically talking about the NHL, your original statement was more generic. One would think that telecasts would be cheaper as they can accommodate more people than a rink.
It will take a LONG time to transfer that 100 bytes over the modem link then receive a similar reply just because the physical layer takes so long. Higher bandwidth will lower latency
Latency is the measure of how long a signal takes to reach the other end, no? High latency will reduce your throughput, but throughput has little (not none) effect on your latency. Is my thinking incorrect?
When I pay the IRS I get something for my money. If I were to choose to pay Comcast I would get a rebroadcast of what I already receive over the air. I don't mind paying for something, I would mind paying for nothing.
Back when I last had Comcast (around 2005 or 2006) the quality of PBS over the cable was so much worse than OTA. It was full of compression artefacts, dropped frames, audio distortion. I called them several times and they always told me their digital picture was perfect. It got even worse when they increased their compression ratio to up their cable modem bandwidth (I never used their internet service, I used DSL because Comcast didn't want to sell me service with a static IP and unfiltered ports) so it was a net loss for me and was the last straw. I cut the cord a week after they rolled out their faster internet service I wasn't using which made my television unwatchable.
Hulu doesn't cost money other than watching the ads which were on southparkstudios.com as well. All the episodes right now are on regular Hulu. You don't need Hulu Plus.
Not yet you don't. Come September 24th you will. Hulu Plus does cost money. Watching most South Park episodes will cost money *in addition* to commercials. That's a net loss for the viewer.
Yes, captions are key in my household of two non-native English speakers. Though it is interesting to note that VLC subtitle handling is *far* superior to Hulu, Netflix and Amazon combined. Fan-written subtitles tend to be of much higher quality much of the time.
I found that starting with several overall reviews of prior material per day and only learning a new segment of a lesson if I felt like I had mastered the prior material to be a good pace. That way I only added new words and concepts after having reiterated over the prior ones several times. I found that I had pretty good control over how quickly I added more words and concepts into my pool of learning and could control just how quickly I progressed.
There is no evil here, only uninformed consumers with a fear of missing out that give a company money for useless in-game items because they don't want to be the only kid on the block that has the blue gun and not the blue and gold gun.
The only way for this kind of abusive marketing to be stopped would be for gamers to boycott the products and vendors, which would be like meth-heads boycotting meth.
They need not even boycott the products. They could wait for the release of the game, study the game's reception, and then if still excited, buy it. If publishers saw that only a minority a game's sales happened during presale shenanigans, they might start putting that effort into more interesting things.
you'd have to buy multiple copies of the game to get all of the content.
It would appear that publishers are cashing in on people's fear of missing out, but I wonder what proportion of gamers actually shell out the price of a game multiple times just to have two different pre-order items. I also wonder what proportion of gamers just wait for the release then read the reviews or watch "Let's Play" videos before making a purchase decision and "miss out" on the (mostly pointless) pre-order items.
I don't see why you think that someone who is capable of not playing games or watching movies or "consuming content" for a few hours does not fly. Some people can actually chill out for a bit.
I came here to basically ask the same question, although without the jab that the quester is bad at his or her job. One gets good at design by attempting more design and learning from one's failures and shortcomings. One does not get good at design by becoming a salesman or saleswoman. That said, in this case, identify that problem you want to solve and communicate it clearly; a design might coalesce from that process even before engaging others.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think we ever weren't good. I was just learning because what I learned in signals and systems did not jive with what you claimed. It turns out you and I were using latency differently.
We still have these things called public libraries, and subscriptions for residents are usually free.
Not where I live. For some reason, in my city they do not have a library and they don't participate with surrounding cities to provide access to theirs. I can go read a book there, but if I want to check something out I'll have to pay the yearly fee. Really sucks.
If you live in a democracy, you might want to lobby your city to change this stance. It'll make for a more desirable and livable city.
DRM is a publisher choice. It is a checkbox in the Amazon "publish my book" interface. All of my books sold through amazon are DRM free. If you want to know how to tell (since it is non-obvious)... under "product details" there is an item called "Simultaneous Device Usage" if that says "unlimited" it is DRM free.
If a book says unlimited, is the file actually DRM free, or is the DRM just permissive. Can a publisher, or Amazon, later change that number from unlimited to something more restrictive and push out the update to terms to devices just like they can push out deletion commands to devices?
My wife goes through 8-12 novels a month, and often the more recent ones are either not available from the local library or are checked out/reserved, so we're spending $40 or more on new or used books that generally get given away when she's done with them.
I solved a similar problem by time-shifting my reading a little. When I want to read a book, I reserve it at the library. When my place in line comes up, I read it. With a sufficiently flexible schedule I read everything I want to read, just not immediately. That's okay though because my reading list is long enough that I'm not without things to read.
Physically the speed of the signals going over the wire are the same, being electrical signals going over the same wires, but the 100 bytes go faster (and have lower latency) on the ADSL link because they get on and off the wire faster.
That's why I said it has little effect. I'm convinced that latency has a large effect on throughput but I am unconvinced that throughput has a large effect on latency. I get 16ms latency on my ADSL connection, which is 1.5Mb/s. I don't know anyone with 20+ Mb/s cable connections that has much lower latency than my connection. On the other hand, if you go to something like a 2400 baud modem then latencies are up noticeably.
So, am I misunderstanding? Gigabit fibre should have significantly better latency than a lowly 1.5Mb/s ADSL link? I am not sure it does (haven't tested one).
I did not realize you were specifically talking about the NHL, your original statement was more generic. One would think that telecasts would be cheaper as they can accommodate more people than a rink.
It will take a LONG time to transfer that 100 bytes over the modem link then receive a similar reply just because the physical layer takes so long. Higher bandwidth will lower latency
Latency is the measure of how long a signal takes to reach the other end, no? High latency will reduce your throughput, but throughput has little (not none) effect on your latency. Is my thinking incorrect?
Generally higher bandwidth means lower latency
Could you explain how that is, please?
When I pay the IRS I get something for my money. If I were to choose to pay Comcast I would get a rebroadcast of what I already receive over the air. I don't mind paying for something, I would mind paying for nothing.
Would going to a hockey rink and watching people play solve your problem or is your problem more specific than "I also like to watch hockey?"
Back when I last had Comcast (around 2005 or 2006) the quality of PBS over the cable was so much worse than OTA. It was full of compression artefacts, dropped frames, audio distortion. I called them several times and they always told me their digital picture was perfect. It got even worse when they increased their compression ratio to up their cable modem bandwidth (I never used their internet service, I used DSL because Comcast didn't want to sell me service with a static IP and unfiltered ports) so it was a net loss for me and was the last straw. I cut the cord a week after they rolled out their faster internet service I wasn't using which made my television unwatchable.
Hulu doesn't cost money other than watching the ads which were on southparkstudios.com as well. All the episodes right now are on regular Hulu. You don't need Hulu Plus.
Not yet you don't. Come September 24th you will. Hulu Plus does cost money. Watching most South Park episodes will cost money *in addition* to commercials. That's a net loss for the viewer.
Yes, captions are key in my household of two non-native English speakers. Though it is interesting to note that VLC subtitle handling is *far* superior to Hulu, Netflix and Amazon combined. Fan-written subtitles tend to be of much higher quality much of the time.
I didn't claim that he claimed anything either. I asked him for his opinion.
I found that starting with several overall reviews of prior material per day and only learning a new segment of a lesson if I felt like I had mastered the prior material to be a good pace. That way I only added new words and concepts after having reiterated over the prior ones several times. I found that I had pretty good control over how quickly I added more words and concepts into my pool of learning and could control just how quickly I progressed.
You aren't creating anything in Dwarf Fortress, you are playing with someone else's creation.
You have a very narrow view of creation.
There is no evil here, only uninformed consumers with a fear of missing out that give a company money for useless in-game items because they don't want to be the only kid on the block that has the blue gun and not the blue and gold gun.
If you are to patient, it's your (social) loss.
Like talking about last month's tv shows.
Do you feel that the only art worthwhile appreciating is art created in the last thirty days?
Well said.
The only way for this kind of abusive marketing to be stopped would be for gamers to boycott the products and vendors, which would be like meth-heads boycotting meth.
They need not even boycott the products. They could wait for the release of the game, study the game's reception, and then if still excited, buy it. If publishers saw that only a minority a game's sales happened during presale shenanigans, they might start putting that effort into more interesting things.
you'd have to buy multiple copies of the game to get all of the content.
It would appear that publishers are cashing in on people's fear of missing out, but I wonder what proportion of gamers actually shell out the price of a game multiple times just to have two different pre-order items. I also wonder what proportion of gamers just wait for the release then read the reviews or watch "Let's Play" videos before making a purchase decision and "miss out" on the (mostly pointless) pre-order items.
The irony of such a predictable response...
In addition, if you had an inkling of imagination, you'd be creating, not playing around in someone else's creation.
So if one did not create the sandbox in which one creates, one is not a creator? You have an odd view of creativity.
Here's a hint: a trademark has no natural expiration.
And a trademark can be lost if it's shown that you knew about the infringement but did nothing.
Which is not really a *natural expiration*.
We don't put people in jail for their thoughts.
I'm not convinced this is true.
Neither was the judge, I take it. I believe that was a statement to remind us how we intend to live not how we do live.
I don't see why you think that someone who is capable of not playing games or watching movies or "consuming content" for a few hours does not fly. Some people can actually chill out for a bit.
I came here to basically ask the same question, although without the jab that the quester is bad at his or her job. One gets good at design by attempting more design and learning from one's failures and shortcomings. One does not get good at design by becoming a salesman or saleswoman. That said, in this case, identify that problem you want to solve and communicate it clearly; a design might coalesce from that process even before engaging others.
So, what is the problem you want to solve?