In the original vision of the Internet everything is supposed to be a server, so we're back at square one.
Creating a system where one has to opt in to have a routable IP is treading on a slippery slope. Soon after, you might need a special permit to have a server, and before you know it we're back to gatekeepers and the telephone network.
Why shouldn't non-geeks have routable IPs? How many future Shawn Fannings, DVD Jons, or Linus Torvalds' would we lose through such restriction? The Internet should stay as connected as possible, so that the innovation and creativity at the ends stays unencumbered and free. Just think about how long it took telephone companies to implement call-waiting, *69, etc. Also check out the End-to-end Arguments in System Design, it's a classic.
That viewpoint is just as selfish as of those who demand the big gas guzzling SUV, because it is not the planet that is doomed, but the people living on it. The planet doesn't care about pollution.
Another quip is that reducing pollution IS a goal, except it is not the only one. It is usually lower on the priority list, somewhere under putting food on the table and keeping a roof over the head.
No kidding:) Mine needed valve work so I got it cheap. Now of course there are all the arguments about how much one's time is worth, etc., so this approach to life doesn't scale. But as a hobby it does have nice side effects.
I agree with you. I had good luck with older Benzes, such as the 190E 2.3-16. They are not all that efficient, but it's not really an issue when the car costs $1-2k. A lot of fun to drive:)
You can for example try to shift the phase of your carrier with a symbol clock of say 1000ns or you can double the symbol rate by shifting phase every 500ns.
OK, but doing that would increase the bandwidth. I don't think you'll be able to increase the spectral *efficiency* much, and especially not by orders of magnitude like these guys claim they can.
More likely however, even though there is still a lot we could squeeze out of 1MHz of spectrum: it is hype but hey... surprise me...
Is this true? I thought modern modulation/coding/etc. schemes were already close to the Shannon limit. Barring some serious MIMO trickery I doubt this company can do what they claim they do.
As the other posters said, noice cancelling is really hard, and even when it works, only works to a degree.
Depending on your motivation, other fun technical solutions may apply. Recently I've been running into situations where wireless headsets would've been really useful; for example, in any noisy environment, or situations where the speakers get separated out of earshot. I would love to have some while shopping or hiking with company. Anyone have any recommendations?
I'm not trying to pick on Slashdot here. I'm being fair. Even if there is a technical problem, you owe it to your customers to be direct and accommodating about it. I know this is an isolated incident, but this is no way to run a business. It's completely unacceptable and unprofessional.
The "you share a subnet with a troll" was pretty direct. As for accomodating, you have to consider the big picture. What's better, to lose half the users due to crapflooding, or lose a handful as collateral damage while blocking bad apples?
I really don't understand the whole bunch of people complaining about slashdot's design, whether here or on digg. Switching to another site because it has a cleaner css design is the dumbest reason I've ever heard. Ugly, beautiful, who cares? This is not an art museum, this is a discussion board, and the best one I know at that.
No need to limit ourselves to yellow. We could use patterns of sub-1mm dots of several colors, such as red, green and blue to create patterns encoding some sort of information that could be decoded with a little bit of effort.
Let them all start their own DNS systems, breaking the Internet into segments.
Having several DNS trees wouldn't be too terrible, since users (including ISPs here) would be free to choose a good root. However, there is a more sinister possibility that they create whole new IP address spaces, which would really segment the net. Like you say, this really hurts the non-US areas most, so I hope they complain loudly.
Would you consider posting the text of the article as a comment? It's not like you'll be getting hits in the meantime anyway and it might bring people back for the pictures later.
From the article: After the ruling he praised Google, noting, "the culture is very supportive, collaborative, innovative, and Internet-like -- and that's bottoms-up innovation rather than top-down direction."
Why do I get a mental picture of a row of Google engineers mooning Steve Ballmer?
Slashdot Mirror
In the original vision of the Internet everything is supposed to be a server, so we're back at square one.
Creating a system where one has to opt in to have a routable IP is treading on a slippery slope. Soon after, you might need a special permit to have a server, and before you know it we're back to gatekeepers and the telephone network.
Why shouldn't non-geeks have routable IPs? How many future Shawn Fannings, DVD Jons, or Linus Torvalds' would we lose through such restriction? The Internet should stay as connected as possible, so that the innovation and creativity at the ends stays unencumbered and free. Just think about how long it took telephone companies to implement call-waiting, *69, etc. Also check out the End-to-end Arguments in System Design, it's a classic.
You hypocrite-- here you are preaching about less polluting engine and yet you drive a V-8! ;)
That viewpoint is just as selfish as of those who demand the big gas guzzling SUV, because it is not the planet that is doomed, but the people living on it. The planet doesn't care about pollution.
Another quip is that reducing pollution IS a goal, except it is not the only one. It is usually lower on the priority list, somewhere under putting food on the table and keeping a roof over the head.
If you can find a 16V for $2000, I'll take three.
:) Mine needed valve work so I got it cheap. Now of course there are all the arguments about how much one's time is worth, etc., so this approach to life doesn't scale. But as a hobby it does have nice side effects.
No kidding
I agree with you. I had good luck with older Benzes, such as the 190E 2.3-16. They are not all that efficient, but it's not really an issue when the car costs $1-2k. A lot of fun to drive :)
...arrays of supercapacitors... ...masses of these devices...
Railguns!
DIY welding!
And NO wind tower is going to be able to withstand a hurricane
There are no materials that can resist these sorts of forces.
Step 1: Build huge concrete cube.
Step 2: Stick a Concorde engine on top.
Step 3: Wind tower that sustains supersonic wind speeds!
As a future PhD it would behoove you to be more careful with absolute statements.
You can for example try to shift the phase of your carrier with a symbol clock of say 1000ns or you can double the symbol rate by shifting phase every 500ns.
OK, but doing that would increase the bandwidth. I don't think you'll be able to increase the spectral *efficiency* much, and especially not by orders of magnitude like these guys claim they can.
More likely however, even though there is still a lot we could squeeze out of 1MHz of spectrum: it is hype but hey... surprise me...
Is this true? I thought modern modulation/coding/etc. schemes were already close to the Shannon limit. Barring some serious MIMO trickery I doubt this company can do what they claim they do.
I believe we need new electronic documents which are transparent, public, principled, and freed from the traditions of hierarchy and paper.
And I believe that I need 10 million dollars by noon tomorrow. Unfortunately, in both cases, there is a "2. ???" step that needs to be filled in.
Generally speaking, all generalizations arnt 100% accurate.
But... what... if... your generalization... not accurate... brain melting... FZZ BZZZ *POP*!
You know, if you thought the Cydonia conspiracy nutjobs were crazy, wait until they get ahold of this little story :)
As the other posters said, noice cancelling is really hard, and even when it works, only works to a degree.
Depending on your motivation, other fun technical solutions may apply. Recently I've been running into situations where wireless headsets would've been really useful; for example, in any noisy environment, or situations where the speakers get separated out of earshot. I would love to have some while shopping or hiking with company. Anyone have any recommendations?
I'm not trying to pick on Slashdot here. I'm being fair. Even if there is a technical problem, you owe it to your customers to be direct and accommodating about it. I know this is an isolated incident, but this is no way to run a business. It's completely unacceptable and unprofessional.
The "you share a subnet with a troll" was pretty direct. As for accomodating, you have to consider the big picture. What's better, to lose half the users due to crapflooding, or lose a handful as collateral damage while blocking bad apples?
I really don't understand the whole bunch of people complaining about slashdot's design, whether here or on digg. Switching to another site because it has a cleaner css design is the dumbest reason I've ever heard. Ugly, beautiful, who cares? This is not an art museum, this is a discussion board, and the best one I know at that.
No need to limit ourselves to yellow. We could use patterns of sub-1mm dots of several colors, such as red, green and blue to create patterns encoding some sort of information that could be decoded with a little bit of effort.
*** ZOT! ***
At last, a chance to deploy IPv6!
Let them all start their own DNS systems, breaking the Internet into segments.
Having several DNS trees wouldn't be too terrible, since users (including ISPs here) would be free to choose a good root. However, there is a more sinister possibility that they create whole new IP address spaces, which would really segment the net. Like you say, this really hurts the non-US areas most, so I hope they complain loudly.
I guess with all the money you will be making, you should buy yourself a nice yacht and name it "Mandor!"
(GPLv2 clause 2)
:)
[first]You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program[/first],
[second]and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above,
provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
My question: does the "provided" apply just to [second] or to both [first] and [second] ? Who wrote this, the Oracle at Delphi?
Would you consider posting the text of the article as a comment?
It's not like you'll be getting hits in the meantime anyway and it
might bring people back for the pictures later.
Yeah but without some serious LSD you can't come up with LSC++.
*rimshot*
From the article:
After the ruling he praised Google, noting, "the culture is very supportive, collaborative, innovative, and Internet-like -- and that's bottoms-up innovation rather than top-down direction."
Why do I get a mental picture of a row of Google engineers mooning Steve Ballmer?
"Human scientists discover the secret of Automated Repair"