rh9 was the last free release and was followed-up with fedora core 1. rhel is not free and you cannot install it and get updates anywhere you please. fedora 9, etc. are still free, but not supported except by the community, and not stable.
centos, scientific linux, and a number of others take the gpl code that rh provides in rhel, they rip out the rh artwork/logos, and distribute compatible biniaries. note that rh requires the rip out the rh artwork/logos as they are trademarked or whatever.
Many older named.conf configs have "query-source port 53;". While this is nice for firewalls to open up DNS traffic (assuming replies from source udp/53 to destination udp/53 (your query port) are always safe), it makes it easy to exploit.
This must be removed and those nameserver restarted. I had to do this with all of my servers, otherwise all queries come from the same port (53). Complain to your ISP if you find this to be the case with their DNS servers and in the meantime use some other DNS servers.
My two local Comcast resolves show "Poor" as the ports they use only have a standard deviation of 130-150, which I guess is assumed to be far too obvious and easy to keep bombarding.
Second, your NAT router may be de-randomizing your DNS queries if you run a resolver at home, and taking your random ports and putting them in order starting at 1024 (or something similar).
My own local/internal DNS servers shows as a std dev of 9 since my PAT router is de-randomizing the external ports. I'll be replacing my PAT router.
Third, your NAT router may be your DNS resolver and may not be using random source ports.
Does LoJack, et. al. have BIOS-level software? I haven't researched that specifically, but that seems like a lot of overhead, but perhaps if that is their only line of work they just by the BIOS software and add their code blobs and update your machine with it... that sounds kinda risky, but I guess so long as they'll replace your laptop so long as they blow up the BIOS.
I have a locked down on my laptops called "Guest-password-is-BLAH" where "BLAH" is the password they need to login. They can just click on the "Guest-password-is..." account and put in the password and have access, and hopefully they'll associate to an AP and I'll know about it. Sometimes you gotta spoon-feed them.
Which is all well and good, but it should be optional. Since it is OSS it could be changed, but it would be nice to have an easy option so you can check "Use my server" and perhaps optionally use OpenDHT if my server isn't reachable (or not, if you just don't care and only want to trust your own system(s)).
I've written my own script that does this same thing (supplies all the same data, doesn't use OpenDHT), and getting the webcam automated was next on my list (which they don't have yet for Linux anyway), but it's always nice to have automated updates (assuming it gets rolled up as a package in Fedora, the distro I use) and automatic cool features.
So if I leave my keys in my car and someone uses it for joyrides or hold-ups, I'm not responsible either?
Home users aren't common carriers, are they? With that analogy everyone can just open up all their APs and so long as their PC/userid/etc is anonymous (randomized) you can download all the copyright content you want illegally, so long as you store it in something like TrueCrypt, and no one can prosecute as you can just claim it was your neighbor, right?
It's really not that hard to ignore them. I've had one for about a year (the 8830). I tune out the blinking red light when I'm not working, or if it is annoying me I turn the phone upside down so I cannot see it.
I find it very useful when I'm on site and I can keep up a bit more, whereas otherwise I'd be a day or two behind on emails.
Yeah, and I totally could. I had our HR person who handles getting cell phones from Verizon get in writing that my unlimited data usage meant there was no cap and I could download all day long on it without and usage bills or cancellation.
I don't get these carriers. Verizon is one of the worst too. My Blackberry 8830 has a GPS receiver built in, but can I use it? No, not without paying VZ $10/month and even then I can only use their approved apps, not 3rd party apps like Google Maps. At least Google Maps will figure it out within a few square blocks based on the towers.
Charge me for TXT when I have unlimited data? How lame is that. I'll just use Google Talk or regular Blackberry to Exchange emailing.
Charge me for minutes? That's really lame too when I have unlimited data and can run a vpn from my laptop and a softphone. Yeah, it's not like I want to whip out my laptop to make calls, but if I'm remote and setup somewhere for a while, I can - all day long, and never make a VZ wireless call.
But how many places do you sign in at which don't offer SSL? Typically the cost is too high and there is little need to offer it. Unless money is involved, there usually isn't money to be spent developing it.
Slashdot doesn't offer it, but then slashdot is free. You'll find many things that are free aren't going to spend money to add cost if there is no one asking for it.
I email with tons of geeks. I've got GPG keys, but no one ever uses them. The only folks that do use encryption with me is my brother and my Wife.
But then we all know all of our phone calls are getting listened to for "keywords" (or because we manage to get on someone's "list"), and how many folks are encrypting that? Cost is too high, and no one wants to spend anything for it, and really, no one is asking for it.
Enigmail is an OSS plugin for Thurderbird that gives GPG/PGP support.
Firefox and IE also don't have built-in Flash or Java support, but we all fix that within the first 5 minutes of an install, right? Email encryption should be no different.
The hardest problem I find is getting people to maintain their keys and a real trusted way to exchange keys w/o man-in-the-middle attacks.
Just putting your key in pgp.mit.edu or on your homepage doesn't prevent man-in-the-middle attacks any more than an SSL cert not signed by a CA that your browser already trusts is worth anything (again, unless you securely download that self-issued SSL key).
Who the h*** is Dag Wieers? Should we pay attention anyway?
Maybe I should also write an article so that I can be quoted as "...Bogaboga supports Coordinated Linux release proposal..."
To quote someone else who posted 3 minutes before you:
Dag Wieers is known to just about every user of RedHat Enterprise Linux and CentOS, because he and a few other people provide a ton of 3rd part packages that make life more bearable. See:http://dag.wieers.com/rpm/packages.php
He's also one of the people behind rpmforge, which tries to make a unified repo of 3rd party add-on packages. Previously there were a number of incompatible (dependencies and so forth) repositories like atrpms. Dag's work benefits all of us who use RHEL on a regular basis...
With TrueCrypt, you can have two passwords. One for the "fake" volume, and one for the hidden volume. If you put in the fake password, you see the contents there (put family pics, etc.). If you do the other password, you'll get the other content.
No way to detect it if it is done right, and no way they can prove anything else is there, nor decode it.
Hmm, I'm not a Mormon, so I speak on no authority, but what I have read is that the view is that the scriptures were tainted, and that Joseph Smith had to fix them, and there is a much altered version of the Bible used by the Mormons.
My source - which I'll quote from: "The final severance from biblical accountability is the continued LDS teaching that what was left of the scriptures has been so often and badly translated that our present Bible is of almost no "stand alone" value. Apostle Orson Pratt summed up the LDS position when he stated, ". ..and who, in his right mind, could for one moment, suppose the Bible in its present form to be a perfect guide? Who knows that even one verse of the whole Bible has escaped pollution, so as to convey the same sense now that it did in the original?"(2)
Joseph Smith taught, "I believe the Bible as it read when it came from the pen of the original writers. Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors."(3)"... "One area of this study clarified a long debated topic among the various subgroupings within the various branches of Josephite or Restorationist churches. It dealt with the authenticity of a manuscript called the Inspired Version of the Bible, written by Joseph Smith prior to his death. The copyrighted property of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints [RLDS], was never given full credentials by the Utah branch--until its release of the L.D.S. edition of the King James Bible."
So, the LDS has their own version of the KJV, very much influenced by Joseph Smith's own ISV. I don't know more than that.
Back to the point at hand:
The question the Sadducees asked Jesus was, "Who is she married to in heaven?" Jesus said that folks don't marry, but are like the angels - which are not married. In other words, your marriage on earth has no place or purpose in heaven. There isn't any procreation in heaven, you don't need a helpmate, and you won't be alone/lonely - so you don't need a spouse (those were the reasons Adam was given a spouse).
I'm a MyhtDora user (MythTV + Fedora = automated install with little work required, but plenty of hacking available if you want to). I already have automated commercial skip.
Here's what I'd like the ad buesinss to do: tag commercials in some format. If you tag commercials with what they're about, and an "episode" number, I might watch some of them. The episode number is so I can give you easy feedback and thumbs up/down stuff, and mark it that I've seen it, and unless I mark it funny, I don't really need to see it again.
What you really need to do is get people I trust to recommend products. I'm less and less in the minority now as a geek who likes computers, the internet, and high tech stuff (who doesn't these days) - give me geeks who I trust recommending products, and perhaps I'd watch.
I'm thinking folks like from the old TechTV crew. Or other folks in my social network. I don't care if my in-laws recommend some bird commercials - I'm not into birds, but if they recommend some high-tech commercials, I'll watch.
I want the tags so I can filter stuff I don't care about. I don't care about buying a car - unless you want to show me a few cool techie things. I don't want to buy any diapers - I have no babies. I don't need . How about I fill out a profile that only I have access to, and my box will download commercials that fit my profile, if you properly tag them?
I've no idea how you'd sell such a revenue model. I suppose the same as Google does, but it's a bit different with TV. I guess the shows would just get the revenue for the ads sold because they collected the eyeballs. But guess what, they'd need to mark "insert commercial here" and only the folks with OTA would see those broadcast commercials. The rest of us with DVRs get to decide what we see. You have to trust us - we may just turn off commercials altogether.
And don't get your hopes up, I'm not going to watch more than 2-3 commercials a day. But everyone has to go to the bathroom - you can run commercials while I pause for that (as the females in the household require more breaks, and us males are just polite and wait for them... or usually hit the kitchen for a snack, but we'll still be listening and may catch a bit of a commercial).
Here's the thing, you can't lock in any sort of DRM or restrictions. You have to trust that we'll do the right thing. But guess what, you'll get better product sales - and if you build it right we'll probably shop and buy things on the spot. But even if you don't, we can easily pop over to or PCs and buy stuff (why can't I buy stuff on my phone yet? That's so lame).
I never got any of this. I suppose Mormon's have their own version of the Bible, which edited out passages such as:
Matthew 22
23 On that day Sadducees (those who say that there is no resurrection) came to him. They asked him,
24 saying, "Teacher, Moses said, 'If a man dies, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed for hisbrother.'
25 Now there were with us seven brothers. The first married and died, and having no seed left his wife to his brother.
26 In like manner the second also, and the third, to the seventh.
27 After them all, the woman died.
28 In the resurrection therefore, whose wife will she be of the seven? For they all had her."
29 But Jesus answered them, "You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God.
30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are like God's angels in heaven.
I've got a Blackberry w/Verizon for work with an unlimited data plan. I can send and receive all the emails I want via my Inbox (tied to my corporate Exchange), or via Gmail, or even via ssh to my shell account with Alpine. They still charge to send and receive (SMS?) text messages. How lame is that? I can use my tethered modem and get a VPN started and use my Cisco IP Communicator, no extra charge, but no text messaging for free!
My Wife has Cricket, which has unlimited calling and unlimited texting - but doesn't allow her to send emails. Well, it says she can't, and complains each time she does ("Cricket does not support this activity at this time"), but usually it goes through. I think there is a work-around by sending an MMS (?) message and that allowed emailing, but still complains.
It's all lame. If we're paying for what accounts for unlimited data, just give us unlimited data.
While I'm sure everyone's driving ability decreases when multitasking, I don't think it does at the same level.
They need to have a multitasking test to qualify drivers to do certain things, and everyone else be blocked. I mean this in a joking way, but if I ruled the world I'd make it that way;-)
The biggest problem is enforcement. Of course, a police officer can always pull you over for unsafe driving, even if you're not multitasking. But there needs to be some sort of citizen-level enforcement.
Some way to point a radio-id-tag tracker and zap another car and comment on how it's driving (weaving in traffic, distracted while on the phone, going the limit in the fast lane with two other lanes open, etc.).
Don't take one person's word for it, wait for a couple dozen complaints - they'll come fast enough - and then yank all their driving privleges, or limit them to driving with no other multitasking going on.
This could be Comcast's way to keep other providers off their network - unless they pay Comcast to let their traffic through w/o affecting the customer cap.
Think about it - is Comcast going to limit their set top box bandwidth? Of course not, that'd kill them in a heart beat.
Great way to kill streaming video that doesn't come from Comcast - or at least force the provider to pay Comcast to allow it through.
I ran some numbers (I'm just trying to keep it easy using the 1,000 measurement, not 1,024 units):
250GB/month (GigaByte) cap / 12mbits/s max I have available = 1.93mb at peak usage.
I typically download at rates around 3mbits/s (I believe the 12mbits/s is just a burst number). Using that number, that means I only get that speed for at most 7.72days per month before I cap out.
Granted, I'm not using that much bandwidth the entire time, but it wouldn't be unheard of for it to occur.
That just doesn't seem like much to me at all. For regular internet surfing/email it'd be high. Fine - sell a package for that for $25 or something and keep mine as is for $45.
Otherwise, if Comcast wants to change the terms, I'll take my whole package and go elsewhere. The only reason I'm with Comcast is the 3mb/s download speed I get (all the time) with the big burst up front.
Since I won't be getting HD without a more expensive package and a set top box (which possible won't work with my MyhtDora setup), this may just push me into looking at OTA and moving back to AT&T/DSL (ACK!). I just wish AT&T didn't require a POTS line. I haven't had a POTS line in 4 years, and I don't see the need to pay the $20-25/month for it just to have DSL.
Of course, that's probably fine with Comcast. They don't want users like me around anyway - I call up and complain about not getting the channels my package says I should have and make them dispatch - I complain when my cable modem dies constantly throughout the summer and make them replace it and the lines to my house (all their cable) - worst, I'm a dreaded high-bandwidth user. But I always pay my bill on time (2 business days ahead of time).
DirectTV wants me back though - I keep getting there letters all the time, but fortunately they don't have any packages I want (give me a cheap base + a la carte option and I'd consider).
I'm not metered on water (yet), but I know my natural gas and electricity rates go up once I cross the limits.
If you think about that, it doesn't make sense: If they charge you less power, then you could just sell it to all your neighbors and you'd all come out ahead since you wouldn't have to pay the base higher rate (well, just one time).
I think the real crunch is the time of day usage peaks. From the stats I have access to at one ISP I do work for, usage starts to climb at 8am, from 10am-midnight is consistantly high, but doesn't totally drop off until somewhere between 1-2am.
My suggestion to Comcast would be to use a time-based rate limit. From 8am - 2am local track the bandwidth, from 2am - 8am give untracked time.
All us geeks can schedule our torrents and other downloads to run during that time.
My stuff is all legal, but I can easily consume that much bandwidth in a busy month. I download a handful of DVD ISOs (Fedora betas, previews, releases, CentOS releases, MythDora betas and releases, Live CDs) and all that can wait until off-hours.
My day usage for work (I work from home 2-3 days a week, sometimes the entire week) is often pretty constant as well. I've typcially got Cisco MeetingPlace sessions going (seen the new Cisco commercials with the little girl selling cookies? I sell the stuff that makes all the work), with multiple VPNs going on back to the office and customers all day long, downloading Cisco patches (CallManager 5/6 "patches" are 1.5gb each), etc.
Plus, we're going to see more and more streaming TV/movies going on. We've a MythDora box, and if ever they removed all the DRM junk and just let us download movies to watch how we want, we'd be watching them on there.
Comcast needs to get over the fact that we may have our own "set top" boxes that don't come from them (like my MythDora) and may get our content from another provider, using our unlimited bandwidth.
Again, my 2am-8am solution would work here - I don't care about seeing most shows the same day/time it is on. There are some things my Wife wants that way (American Idle, Dancing with the Stars) as people are talking about it the next day, but all the rest can wait a day (and we probably won't watch it for many days, perhaps a week or so). If I want to download this from my own content provider, I could schedule this for 2am-8am.
That, and 250gb/month is going to seem very small very soon. I recently turned up a 1gb/s internet connection to CSU CENIC at my children's district office, which in turn has 1gb/s internal connections to all the district schools. They don't even know how to use that much bandwidth (yet) having come from sharing something like 40mb/s before.
I'm betting my local junior college will be getting a similar connection soon as well and could offer high-bandwidth classes, and for that matter many schools are offering that.
I've got 4 kids, ages 7-10, and right now there internet usage is rather light (lego.com, disney.com, etc.), but there all a bit on the geekish side like me, and I'm sure we'll always be a top-0.01% "normal" usage household (not downloading anything not legally available) - at least for another 11-15 years or so (depending if they stay at home to go to the local JC and CSU).
If Comcast wants to pull this sort of stunt locally, they may also find themselves losing their franchises.
Slashdot Mirror
rh9 was the last free release and was followed-up with fedora core 1. rhel is not free and you cannot install it and get updates anywhere you please. fedora 9, etc. are still free, but not supported except by the community, and not stable.
centos, scientific linux, and a number of others take the gpl code that rh provides in rhel, they rip out the rh artwork/logos, and distribute compatible biniaries. note that rh requires the rip out the rh artwork/logos as they are trademarked or whatever.
pardon the lack of caps. keyboard is acting up.
Many older named.conf configs have "query-source port 53;". While this is nice for firewalls to open up DNS traffic (assuming replies from source udp/53 to destination udp/53 (your query port) are always safe), it makes it easy to exploit.
This must be removed and those nameserver restarted. I had to do this with all of my servers, otherwise all queries come from the same port (53). Complain to your ISP if you find this to be the case with their DNS servers and in the meantime use some other DNS servers.
My two local Comcast resolves show "Poor" as the ports they use only have a standard deviation of 130-150, which I guess is assumed to be far too obvious and easy to keep bombarding.
Second, your NAT router may be de-randomizing your DNS queries if you run a resolver at home, and taking your random ports and putting them in order starting at 1024 (or something similar).
My own local/internal DNS servers shows as a std dev of 9 since my PAT router is de-randomizing the external ports. I'll be replacing my PAT router.
Third, your NAT router may be your DNS resolver and may not be using random source ports.
Does LoJack, et. al. have BIOS-level software? I haven't researched that specifically, but that seems like a lot of overhead, but perhaps if that is their only line of work they just by the BIOS software and add their code blobs and update your machine with it... that sounds kinda risky, but I guess so long as they'll replace your laptop so long as they blow up the BIOS.
I have a locked down on my laptops called "Guest-password-is-BLAH" where "BLAH" is the password they need to login. They can just click on the "Guest-password-is..." account and put in the password and have access, and hopefully they'll associate to an AP and I'll know about it. Sometimes you gotta spoon-feed them.
Which is all well and good, but it should be optional. Since it is OSS it could be changed, but it would be nice to have an easy option so you can check "Use my server" and perhaps optionally use OpenDHT if my server isn't reachable (or not, if you just don't care and only want to trust your own system(s)).
I've written my own script that does this same thing (supplies all the same data, doesn't use OpenDHT), and getting the webcam automated was next on my list (which they don't have yet for Linux anyway), but it's always nice to have automated updates (assuming it gets rolled up as a package in Fedora, the distro I use) and automatic cool features.
So if I leave my keys in my car and someone uses it for joyrides or hold-ups, I'm not responsible either?
Home users aren't common carriers, are they? With that analogy everyone can just open up all their APs and so long as their PC/userid/etc is anonymous (randomized) you can download all the copyright content you want illegally, so long as you store it in something like TrueCrypt, and no one can prosecute as you can just claim it was your neighbor, right?
It's really not that hard to ignore them. I've had one for about a year (the 8830). I tune out the blinking red light when I'm not working, or if it is annoying me I turn the phone upside down so I cannot see it.
I find it very useful when I'm on site and I can keep up a bit more, whereas otherwise I'd be a day or two behind on emails.
Yeah, and I totally could. I had our HR person who handles getting cell phones from Verizon get in writing that my unlimited data usage meant there was no cap and I could download all day long on it without and usage bills or cancellation.
I don't get these carriers. Verizon is one of the worst too. My Blackberry 8830 has a GPS receiver built in, but can I use it? No, not without paying VZ $10/month and even then I can only use their approved apps, not 3rd party apps like Google Maps. At least Google Maps will figure it out within a few square blocks based on the towers.
Charge me for TXT when I have unlimited data? How lame is that. I'll just use Google Talk or regular Blackberry to Exchange emailing.
Charge me for minutes? That's really lame too when I have unlimited data and can run a vpn from my laptop and a softphone. Yeah, it's not like I want to whip out my laptop to make calls, but if I'm remote and setup somewhere for a while, I can - all day long, and never make a VZ wireless call.
But how many places do you sign in at which don't offer SSL? Typically the cost is too high and there is little need to offer it. Unless money is involved, there usually isn't money to be spent developing it.
Slashdot doesn't offer it, but then slashdot is free. You'll find many things that are free aren't going to spend money to add cost if there is no one asking for it.
I email with tons of geeks. I've got GPG keys, but no one ever uses them. The only folks that do use encryption with me is my brother and my Wife.
But then we all know all of our phone calls are getting listened to for "keywords" (or because we manage to get on someone's "list"), and how many folks are encrypting that? Cost is too high, and no one wants to spend anything for it, and really, no one is asking for it.
Enigmail is an OSS plugin for Thurderbird that gives GPG/PGP support.
Firefox and IE also don't have built-in Flash or Java support, but we all fix that within the first 5 minutes of an install, right? Email encryption should be no different.
The hardest problem I find is getting people to maintain their keys and a real trusted way to exchange keys w/o man-in-the-middle attacks.
Just putting your key in pgp.mit.edu or on your homepage doesn't prevent man-in-the-middle attacks any more than an SSL cert not signed by a CA that your browser already trusts is worth anything (again, unless you securely download that self-issued SSL key).
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/packages/firefox/3.0/1.fc9/i386/firefox-3.0-1.fc9.i386.rpm
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/packages/xulrunner/1.9/1.fc9/i386/xulrunner-1.9-1.fc9.i386.rpm
You can update to them now:
rpm -Uvh http://koji.fedoraproject.org/packages/firefox/3.0/1.fc9/i386/firefox-3.0-1.fc9.i386.rpm http://koji.fedoraproject.org/packages/xulrunner/1.9/1.fc9/i386/xulrunner-1.9-1.fc9.i386.rpm
Maybe I should also write an article so that I can be quoted as "...Bogaboga supports Coordinated Linux release proposal..."
To quote someone else who posted 3 minutes before you: Dag Wieers is known to just about every user of RedHat Enterprise Linux and CentOS, because he and a few other people provide a ton of 3rd part packages that make life more bearable. See:http://dag.wieers.com/rpm/packages.phpHe's also one of the people behind rpmforge, which tries to make a unified repo of 3rd party add-on packages. Previously there were a number of incompatible (dependencies and so forth) repositories like atrpms. Dag's work benefits all of us who use RHEL on a regular basis...
With TrueCrypt, you can have two passwords. One for the "fake" volume, and one for the hidden volume. If you put in the fake password, you see the contents there (put family pics, etc.). If you do the other password, you'll get the other content.
No way to detect it if it is done right, and no way they can prove anything else is there, nor decode it.
Hmm, I'm not a Mormon, so I speak on no authority, but what I have read is that the view is that the scriptures were tainted, and that Joseph Smith had to fix them, and there is a much altered version of the Bible used by the Mormons.
.and who, in his right mind, could for one moment, suppose the Bible in its present form to be a perfect guide? Who knows that even one verse of the whole Bible has escaped pollution, so as to convey the same sense now that it did in the original?"(2)
...
My source - which I'll quote from:
"The final severance from biblical accountability is the continued LDS teaching that what was left of the scriptures has been so often and badly translated that our present Bible is of almost no "stand alone" value. Apostle Orson Pratt summed up the LDS position when he stated, ". .
Joseph Smith taught, "I believe the Bible as it read when it came from the pen of the original writers. Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors."(3)"
"One area of this study clarified a long debated topic among the various subgroupings within the various branches of Josephite or Restorationist churches. It dealt with the authenticity of a manuscript called the Inspired Version of the Bible, written by Joseph Smith prior to his death. The copyrighted property of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints [RLDS], was never given full credentials by the Utah branch--until its release of the L.D.S. edition of the King James Bible."
So, the LDS has their own version of the KJV, very much influenced by Joseph Smith's own ISV. I don't know more than that.
Back to the point at hand:
The question the Sadducees asked Jesus was, "Who is she married to in heaven?" Jesus said that folks don't marry, but are like the angels - which are not married. In other words, your marriage on earth has no place or purpose in heaven. There isn't any procreation in heaven, you don't need a helpmate, and you won't be alone/lonely - so you don't need a spouse (those were the reasons Adam was given a spouse).
I'm a MyhtDora user (MythTV + Fedora = automated install with little work required, but plenty of hacking available if you want to). I already have automated commercial skip.
Here's what I'd like the ad buesinss to do: tag commercials in some format. If you tag commercials with what they're about, and an "episode" number, I might watch some of them. The episode number is so I can give you easy feedback and thumbs up/down stuff, and mark it that I've seen it, and unless I mark it funny, I don't really need to see it again.
What you really need to do is get people I trust to recommend products. I'm less and less in the minority now as a geek who likes computers, the internet, and high tech stuff (who doesn't these days) - give me geeks who I trust recommending products, and perhaps I'd watch.
I'm thinking folks like from the old TechTV crew. Or other folks in my social network. I don't care if my in-laws recommend some bird commercials - I'm not into birds, but if they recommend some high-tech commercials, I'll watch.
I want the tags so I can filter stuff I don't care about. I don't care about buying a car - unless you want to show me a few cool techie things. I don't want to buy any diapers - I have no babies. I don't need . How about I fill out a profile that only I have access to, and my box will download commercials that fit my profile, if you properly tag them?
I've no idea how you'd sell such a revenue model. I suppose the same as Google does, but it's a bit different with TV. I guess the shows would just get the revenue for the ads sold because they collected the eyeballs. But guess what, they'd need to mark "insert commercial here" and only the folks with OTA would see those broadcast commercials. The rest of us with DVRs get to decide what we see. You have to trust us - we may just turn off commercials altogether.
And don't get your hopes up, I'm not going to watch more than 2-3 commercials a day. But everyone has to go to the bathroom - you can run commercials while I pause for that (as the females in the household require more breaks, and us males are just polite and wait for them... or usually hit the kitchen for a snack, but we'll still be listening and may catch a bit of a commercial).
Here's the thing, you can't lock in any sort of DRM or restrictions. You have to trust that we'll do the right thing. But guess what, you'll get better product sales - and if you build it right we'll probably shop and buy things on the spot. But even if you don't, we can easily pop over to or PCs and buy stuff (why can't I buy stuff on my phone yet? That's so lame).
I never got any of this. I suppose Mormon's have their own version of the Bible, which edited out passages such as:
Matthew 22
23 On that day Sadducees (those who say that there is no resurrection) came to him. They asked him,
24 saying, "Teacher, Moses said, 'If a man dies, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed for hisbrother.'
25 Now there were with us seven brothers. The first married and died, and having no seed left his wife to his brother.
26 In like manner the second also, and the third, to the seventh.
27 After them all, the woman died.
28 In the resurrection therefore, whose wife will she be of the seven? For they all had her."
29 But Jesus answered them, "You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God.
30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are like God's angels in heaven.
A text message is great when you're in a meeting, or trying to get someone in a meeting.
I've got a Blackberry w/Verizon for work with an unlimited data plan. I can send and receive all the emails I want via my Inbox (tied to my corporate Exchange), or via Gmail, or even via ssh to my shell account with Alpine. They still charge to send and receive (SMS?) text messages. How lame is that? I can use my tethered modem and get a VPN started and use my Cisco IP Communicator, no extra charge, but no text messaging for free!
My Wife has Cricket, which has unlimited calling and unlimited texting - but doesn't allow her to send emails. Well, it says she can't, and complains each time she does ("Cricket does not support this activity at this time"), but usually it goes through. I think there is a work-around by sending an MMS (?) message and that allowed emailing, but still complains.
It's all lame. If we're paying for what accounts for unlimited data, just give us unlimited data.
While I'm sure everyone's driving ability decreases when multitasking, I don't think it does at the same level.
They need to have a multitasking test to qualify drivers to do certain things, and everyone else be blocked. I mean this in a joking way, but if I ruled the world I'd make it that way
The biggest problem is enforcement. Of course, a police officer can always pull you over for unsafe driving, even if you're not multitasking. But there needs to be some sort of citizen-level enforcement.
Some way to point a radio-id-tag tracker and zap another car and comment on how it's driving (weaving in traffic, distracted while on the phone, going the limit in the fast lane with two other lanes open, etc.).
Don't take one person's word for it, wait for a couple dozen complaints - they'll come fast enough - and then yank all their driving privleges, or limit them to driving with no other multitasking going on.
Ah, only in Jason-land
Exactly.
This could be Comcast's way to keep other providers off their network - unless they pay Comcast to let their traffic through w/o affecting the customer cap.
Think about it - is Comcast going to limit their set top box bandwidth? Of course not, that'd kill them in a heart beat.
Great way to kill streaming video that doesn't come from Comcast - or at least force the provider to pay Comcast to allow it through.
I doubt it'll last for long.
err, 1.93mb should be 1.93 days. In other words, 250GB/month at peak 12mbits/s rate would be reached in 1.93 days.
I ran some numbers (I'm just trying to keep it easy using the 1,000 measurement, not 1,024 units):
250GB/month (GigaByte) cap / 12mbits/s max I have available = 1.93mb at peak usage.
I typically download at rates around 3mbits/s (I believe the 12mbits/s is just a burst number). Using that number, that means I only get that speed for at most 7.72days per month before I cap out.
Granted, I'm not using that much bandwidth the entire time, but it wouldn't be unheard of for it to occur.
That just doesn't seem like much to me at all. For regular internet surfing/email it'd be high. Fine - sell a package for that for $25 or something and keep mine as is for $45.
Otherwise, if Comcast wants to change the terms, I'll take my whole package and go elsewhere. The only reason I'm with Comcast is the 3mb/s download speed I get (all the time) with the big burst up front.
Since I won't be getting HD without a more expensive package and a set top box (which possible won't work with my MyhtDora setup), this may just push me into looking at OTA and moving back to AT&T/DSL (ACK!). I just wish AT&T didn't require a POTS line. I haven't had a POTS line in 4 years, and I don't see the need to pay the $20-25/month for it just to have DSL.
Of course, that's probably fine with Comcast. They don't want users like me around anyway - I call up and complain about not getting the channels my package says I should have and make them dispatch - I complain when my cable modem dies constantly throughout the summer and make them replace it and the lines to my house (all their cable) - worst, I'm a dreaded high-bandwidth user. But I always pay my bill on time (2 business days ahead of time).
DirectTV wants me back though - I keep getting there letters all the time, but fortunately they don't have any packages I want (give me a cheap base + a la carte option and I'd consider).
I wish I had Verizon for my ILEC and FiOS.
I'm not sure you're reading that right.
I'm not metered on water (yet), but I know my natural gas and electricity rates go up once I cross the limits.
If you think about that, it doesn't make sense: If they charge you less power, then you could just sell it to all your neighbors and you'd all come out ahead since you wouldn't have to pay the base higher rate (well, just one time).
I think the real crunch is the time of day usage peaks. From the stats I have access to at one ISP I do work for, usage starts to climb at 8am, from 10am-midnight is consistantly high, but doesn't totally drop off until somewhere between 1-2am.
My suggestion to Comcast would be to use a time-based rate limit. From 8am - 2am local track the bandwidth, from 2am - 8am give untracked time.
All us geeks can schedule our torrents and other downloads to run during that time.
My stuff is all legal, but I can easily consume that much bandwidth in a busy month. I download a handful of DVD ISOs (Fedora betas, previews, releases, CentOS releases, MythDora betas and releases, Live CDs) and all that can wait until off-hours.
My day usage for work (I work from home 2-3 days a week, sometimes the entire week) is often pretty constant as well. I've typcially got Cisco MeetingPlace sessions going (seen the new Cisco commercials with the little girl selling cookies? I sell the stuff that makes all the work), with multiple VPNs going on back to the office and customers all day long, downloading Cisco patches (CallManager 5/6 "patches" are 1.5gb each), etc.
Plus, we're going to see more and more streaming TV/movies going on. We've a MythDora box, and if ever they removed all the DRM junk and just let us download movies to watch how we want, we'd be watching them on there.
Comcast needs to get over the fact that we may have our own "set top" boxes that don't come from them (like my MythDora) and may get our content from another provider, using our unlimited bandwidth.
Again, my 2am-8am solution would work here - I don't care about seeing most shows the same day/time it is on. There are some things my Wife wants that way (American Idle, Dancing with the Stars) as people are talking about it the next day, but all the rest can wait a day (and we probably won't watch it for many days, perhaps a week or so). If I want to download this from my own content provider, I could schedule this for 2am-8am.
That, and 250gb/month is going to seem very small very soon. I recently turned up a 1gb/s internet connection to CSU CENIC at my children's district office, which in turn has 1gb/s internal connections to all the district schools. They don't even know how to use that much bandwidth (yet) having come from sharing something like 40mb/s before.
I'm betting my local junior college will be getting a similar connection soon as well and could offer high-bandwidth classes, and for that matter many schools are offering that.
I've got 4 kids, ages 7-10, and right now there internet usage is rather light (lego.com, disney.com, etc.), but there all a bit on the geekish side like me, and I'm sure we'll always be a top-0.01% "normal" usage household (not downloading anything not legally available) - at least for another 11-15 years or so (depending if they stay at home to go to the local JC and CSU).
If Comcast wants to pull this sort of stunt locally, they may also find themselves losing their franchises.