I spend almost the same amount of time and listen to books from Audible.com when I'm not carpooling. DRM and all aside, the prices can't be beat. New releases, unabridged, can be got for $10 each if you subsribe to the 2-books-a-month plan. They have sales a few times a year as well where all books are $10.
I'm always one of the first to complain about DRM, but I can tolerate Audible's. You actually get something for it with them. Books are are 25-40% of their list price and you and download them rather than get something shipped.
Audble has a variety of platforms that will let you listen, including iPods, PocketPCs, Palm OS, and a bunch of other portable players. My current choice is the Nano. A 2GB iPOd Nano can hold around 10 full-sized novels.
I've seen a bunch of people doing the same whining today. They complain that it's old news, but interesting enough for them to comment on. If they thought it was interesting enough to comment, they could have submitted the story three days ago.
In case they hadn't noticed, it's kind of hard for a Slashdot article to link to future stories.
It's not that the satellites were just left up there longer because they couldn't be replaced, it's because they've lasted longer than they were intended to. Kind of a "if it's not broke, don't fix it" philosophy.
With redundant satellites and constant monitoring from the ground, it's possible to let one go until it fails, mark it as "bad" and replace it a little later.
The article is wrong about 24 satellites being required for full coverage. A full set is 21 with 3 as spares.
The article also implies that the satellites are failing at greater than planned rate, when the opposite is true.
It's probably just a coincidence that the guy quoted in the article, Norman Bonnor, is a backer of the European counterpart to GPS: Galileo. It's not like he'd have an interest in bashing the GPS system to help further justify Galileo's funding?
If you use their VPN you'll have a tunnel to their server. You'll have to trust Google that they aren't doing evil with all the traffic you send their way. But if you use any old open access point you stumble across, who are you trusting? If you're not doing VPN already from that point you're at the mercy of whomever setup the AP and likely not even using WEP. Are you sure that the AP you connect to is some idiot too stupid to rename it something other than "linksys" or is it a honeypot waiting to sniff what you send/receive?
Using Google VPN over an open AP might just be the case of the devil you know vs. the devil you don't know.
After getting hit with a tsunami that destroyed their waterfront (twice ), Hilo Hawaii learned their lesson. The wiped out area became a huge park and rebuilding went on higher up away from the sea.
New Orleans is a bit bigger than Hilo, but building in such a precarious area shouldn't be taken lightly. Even without a hurricane it's a continuous struggle to keep parts of it from flooding. Who should subsidise such an expensive city to maintain and repair?
It's one thing if the annual storms take out some resort property on outlying islands, but a busy city with so much area at risk really needs to step back and evaluate the cost.
When added to the video iPod rumours, it seems to make more sense for Google to tie in with Google Video.
As part of the spin that Apple might do when explaining the reversal on Steve Jobs' "no video" decree. Google Video is a distribution mechanism well suited to short video snippets, just the thing if you were watching it on a small screen, or carrying someplace to watch on a connected monitor. The iPod also has a DRM mechanism built in. Since the DRM scheme is one linked to a portable device, it might be less annoying than one linked to your desktop PC.
I can't picture the benefit for Apple or Google when only audio is involved. But video seems to make more sense.
Yeah, you can whine about banners. But it hasn't kept you off Slashdot. Web sites aren't free, even if you don't pay for them directly. I just did a quick peek and a movie details page has less screen real estate showing ads than Slashdot's main page.
Restriction to posting to registered users, a good idea in my book. Wikipedia has issues with just any yahoo posting things. A commercial site can't have things as open as usenet
Not listing obscure movies isn't what Netflix is about, it's not listing something they don't plan to offer. A movie isn't obscure just because it isn't out on DVD.
I know Amazon doesn't sell used anything, never said it did. But the 3rd party used articles aren't in some separate section. When you search for an item on Amazon you'll be presented with options for new and used.
I'm probably replying to a Netflix troll, especially since they didn't address Netflix and their SPAM background. That's a stink I'll never be able to get over, but with what Amazon has in place already, I wouldn't have to give up much, if any, while avoiding a tainted company like Netflix.
Amazon bought IMDB a while back, and luckily, hasn't screwed it up. The IMDB is the best source for movie and TV info online. When Amazon bought it, the only obvious change was making the "buy it" link in the upper left corner always point to Amazon.
If they tie it in with the IMDB, that would be pretty handy. Search for "Virginia Madsen" and you see a list of all her movies, with boxes next to the ones available for rental. Tick the ones you want and they get added to your queue. This is also a plus since you could search with IMDB for any movie, not just the ones they stock. Want a movie that isn't out on DVD yet? Add it to a wish list.
Amazon also has the setup with used DVDs ( and books ) to ofer deals if you want to buy the movies instead of, or after, renting them. I'd expect them to let you know how long your wait will be for a rental while offering a shorted length if you want to buy one now.
Amazon also didn't pump up the IPO by paying spammers like Netflix did. Netflix will always be tainted by that.
It's illegal to give cash or merchandise to a DJ or radio station to get them to play your song.
It's legal to give a state AG who wants to be governor $25,0000 and just have him "coincidentally" focus the state's legal arm on your favorite pet peeve.
So Don Henley is a good guy for giving Spitzer 1000's of dollars, but a BMG promoter who gives a digital camera to a DJ is a bad guy.
I think the Sony BMG guys are slapping their foreheads and thinking they should have given Spitzer $100,000 and "suggested" he focus efforts on P2P file sharing or music piracy instead.
My examples are fine. There's a difference between "availability" and "reliability".
The graph in the article shows % of calls complete. That's reliability. They didn't show % of the time the system was up, that would have been availability.
Your example is a good one, your conclusion as flawed as theirs. Your example would show 100% reliability when it had poor availability. 30 minute sampling basically sucks if you want to measure network up time. Would two 30-second calls that failed with 30 min sampling be recorded as 1 min of downtime or 1 hour? Either guess would be a bad one, not enough information.
The charts in the linked article didn't say the service was down 5.2%. What it says is call completion failed 5.2% of the time. You can't extrapolate the call completion to determine network availability.
They made a call every 30 mins. If the the VOIP network was down for 20 mins it would still show one missed call. If it wasn't down but the call would have gone through if re-attempted 15 seconds later it would still show as one missed call.
And for calls that that were made, what was the phone provider at the other end? Was there a comparison between say a Vonage-to-Vonage call vs a Vonage-to-POTS call? If the phone network test was calling POTS to POTS, then you'd have to do Vonage to Vonage for comparison. If the VOIP networks are less reliable, is the loss in the IP part or the connection to the POTS line at the other end? The real test of VOIP would be for in-network calls. Connections to the outside POTS network are at the mercy of the carriers, the competition.
We already have seen examples of ISPs screwing with VOIP providers and the phone networks don't like the VOIP competition either.
Interesting study, but the report in the article is sorely lacking in necessary data.
I agree completely. Given how much green screen or CG is done these days in "live action" movies, we need a definition of the term.
"Team America: World Police" had a cinematographer who also did all of the "Matrix" movies. He commented on the DVD how exciting it was to shoot a real movie, with stunts and effect done in front of the camera instead of all green screens.
When a movie featuring marionettes is more "Live" than one with humans, you know we need a new definition.
The Academy will need to decided sometime if "Titanic 2" is so much CG that it falls in the animated feature category.
Google just won a judgement on variations of Google spelling in domain names. After a few thousand new domains get registered, watch for Moby to go after everyone.
I've already synced my SonyEricsson bluetooth cell phone with iCal and the address book on my Mac. So if the iTunes can sync, so should these things.
Add something similar to Salling Clicker as well and the phone is now a remote for the Mac. http://www.salling.com/ Since this doesn't currently work with Motorola
Finally, since I have a charger for my cell phone that can plug into a USB port for power, include a dock that provides syncing and power ( though BT syncing should still be possible.)
Apple had said no PDA, but a modern phone has Contact Manager, Caledar, Camera and Voice. Improve the music player and it could be a slick package.
Yes, the public use aspect is what they ruled on. In the previous interpretation, it was the public who got the property. (roads, public buildings, dams ) In the recent case they allowed a local government to take the property from one person and gave it to another who bribed them with more tax revenue. The previously accepted definition would NOT call this a case of eminent domain. The majority ruled that "public use" is no longer the standard, but "public purpose". Seizing the property and transferring it another private party offering greater tax revenue was deemed sufficient to call this instance "public purpose".
Fair compensation should not even come up. If I steal your car, but leave a check for high bluebook taped to your garage door there wouldn't be a discussion if the amount was sufficient. For property to pass from one indivudal to another there should be some agreement.
The surpreme court is supposed to rule on constitutionality. They screwed the pooch on the the eminent domain one. O'Conner summed it up well: "Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random," O'Connor wrote. "The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms."
While I guess some might construe the "eminent domain" ruling to be a "victory" for states rights, I don't quite see it that way.
In the recent medical marijuana case and "out of state wine purchases" case the SCOTUS took the control out from the states and gave it to the federal government. Yes, technically they ruled that the federal gov't already had control, but the result was less state control.
In the eminent domain case they took the rights from the individual to his property and gave it to the government. While they didn't rule that the constitution prohibited this, it was still a case of control moving up hill, away from individuals.
So IMHO, I wouldn't call that a benefit for states rights, but a continuation on the theme of rights and control moving farther away from the individual. Additionally, I don't think the eminent domain case means the states the only one who can wrest property from the owners, I'm sure the federal gov't could do it as well. All they ruled was the individual is not the master of their domain ( no Seinfeld joke ) So if the gov't wants your property, even if the reason is that some other person "bribed" them with the promise of more taxes, there's nothing you can do but stand there holding your... ( Seinfeld joke here )
A cable between the phone and PC running Skype is too narrow of a focus. The "home version" rather than someone trying to make a service buisness out of sounds better.
Give me a bluetooth adapter than plugs into my POTS phone jack and communicates with the phone. This could be a regular phone line, or VOIP like Vonage. Then I can call out via link, or have incoming calls get transferred as well. As far as the cell company is concerned, I'm making a bunch of calls to the wife.
Incoming should be fairly easy, all incoming calls to the home line get sent to a pre-configured number in the home cell phone. Outbound might be trickier since you'd have to tell the home cell phone what number to dial out.
I'm sure it's coming soon, but a Skype-only solution that takes a cable, that's not all that exciting
Slashdot Mirror
I spend almost the same amount of time and listen to books from Audible.com when I'm not carpooling. DRM and all aside, the prices can't be beat. New releases, unabridged, can be got for $10 each if you subsribe to the 2-books-a-month plan. They have sales a few times a year as well where all books are $10.
I'm always one of the first to complain about DRM, but I can tolerate Audible's. You actually get something for it with them. Books are are 25-40% of their list price and you and download them rather than get something shipped.
Audble has a variety of platforms that will let you listen, including iPods, PocketPCs, Palm OS, and a bunch of other portable players. My current choice is the Nano. A 2GB iPOd Nano can hold around 10 full-sized novels.
I've seen a bunch of people doing the same whining today. They complain that it's old news, but interesting enough for them to comment on. If they thought it was interesting enough to comment, they could have submitted the story three days ago.
In case they hadn't noticed, it's kind of hard for a Slashdot article to link to future stories.
It's not that the satellites were just left up there longer because they couldn't be replaced, it's because they've lasted longer than they were intended to. Kind of a "if it's not broke, don't fix it" philosophy.
With redundant satellites and constant monitoring from the ground, it's possible to let one go until it fails, mark it as "bad" and replace it a little later.
The article is wrong about 24 satellites being required for full coverage. A full set is 21 with 3 as spares.
The article also implies that the satellites are failing at greater than planned rate, when the opposite is true.
It's probably just a coincidence that the guy quoted in the article, Norman Bonnor, is a backer of the European counterpart to GPS: Galileo. It's not like he'd have an interest in bashing the GPS system to help further justify Galileo's funding?
I know Voyager is already there, and now SS1. Are any more of his planes at the Smithsonian? GlobalFlyer?
If you use their VPN you'll have a tunnel to their server. You'll have to trust Google that they aren't doing evil with all the traffic you send their way.
But if you use any old open access point you stumble across, who are you trusting? If you're not doing VPN already from that point you're at the mercy of whomever setup the AP and likely not even using WEP. Are you sure that the AP you connect to is some idiot too stupid to rename it something other than "linksys" or is it a honeypot waiting to sniff what you send/receive?
Using Google VPN over an open AP might just be the case of the devil you know vs. the devil you don't know.
You left of where having nuts and bolts in both metric and inches was all a conspiracy hatched by SnapOn and Craftsman to sell twice as many sockets.
Newer Orleans
After getting hit with a tsunami that destroyed their waterfront (twice ), Hilo Hawaii learned their lesson. The wiped out area became a huge park and rebuilding went on higher up away from the sea.
New Orleans is a bit bigger than Hilo, but building in such a precarious area shouldn't be taken lightly. Even without a hurricane it's a continuous struggle to keep parts of it from flooding. Who should subsidise such an expensive city to maintain and repair?
It's one thing if the annual storms take out some resort property on outlying islands, but a busy city with so much area at risk really needs to step back and evaluate the cost.
When added to the video iPod rumours, it seems to make more sense for Google to tie in with Google Video.
As part of the spin that Apple might do when explaining the reversal on Steve Jobs' "no video" decree. Google Video is a distribution mechanism well suited to short video snippets, just the thing if you were watching it on a small screen, or carrying someplace to watch on a connected monitor. The iPod also has a DRM mechanism built in. Since the DRM scheme is one linked to a portable device, it might be less annoying than one linked to your desktop PC.
I can't picture the benefit for Apple or Google when only audio is involved. But video seems to make more sense.
Yeah, you can whine about banners. But it hasn't kept you off Slashdot. Web sites aren't free, even if you don't pay for them directly. I just did a quick peek and a movie details page has less screen real estate showing ads than Slashdot's main page.
Restriction to posting to registered users, a good idea in my book. Wikipedia has issues with just any yahoo posting things. A commercial site can't have things as open as usenet
Not listing obscure movies isn't what Netflix is about, it's not listing something they don't plan to offer. A movie isn't obscure just because it isn't out on DVD.
I know Amazon doesn't sell used anything, never said it did. But the 3rd party used articles aren't in some separate section. When you search for an item on Amazon you'll be presented with options for new and used.
I'm probably replying to a Netflix troll, especially since they didn't address Netflix and their SPAM background. That's a stink I'll never be able to get over, but with what Amazon has in place already, I wouldn't have to give up much, if any, while avoiding a tainted company like Netflix.
Amazon bought IMDB a while back, and luckily, hasn't screwed it up. The IMDB is the best source for movie and TV info online. When Amazon bought it, the only obvious change was making the "buy it" link in the upper left corner always point to Amazon.
If they tie it in with the IMDB, that would be pretty handy. Search for "Virginia Madsen" and you see a list of all her movies, with boxes next to the ones available for rental. Tick the ones you want and they get added to your queue.
This is also a plus since you could search with IMDB for any movie, not just the ones they stock. Want a movie that isn't out on DVD yet? Add it to a wish list.
Amazon also has the setup with used DVDs ( and books ) to ofer deals if you want to buy the movies instead of, or after, renting them. I'd expect them to let you know how long your wait will be for a rental while offering a shorted length if you want to buy one now.
Amazon also didn't pump up the IPO by paying spammers like Netflix did. Netflix will always be tainted by that.
The Fry's employees are well known for their ignorance and the amount of misniformation they spew.
For years I've said that asking a question about a product from a Fry's clerk resulted in you knowning less than you did before asking the question.
It's nice to know that there's proof now.
What a sad article.
It's illegal to give cash or merchandise to a DJ or radio station to get them to play your song.
It's legal to give a state AG who wants to be governor $25,0000 and just have him "coincidentally" focus the state's legal arm on your favorite pet peeve.
So Don Henley is a good guy for giving Spitzer 1000's of dollars, but a BMG promoter who gives a digital camera to a DJ is a bad guy.
I think the Sony BMG guys are slapping their foreheads and thinking they should have given Spitzer $100,000 and "suggested" he focus efforts on P2P file sharing or music piracy instead.
My examples are fine. There's a difference between "availability" and "reliability".
The graph in the article shows % of calls complete. That's reliability. They didn't show % of the time the system was up, that would have been availability.
Your example is a good one, your conclusion as flawed as theirs. Your example would show 100% reliability when it had poor availability. 30 minute sampling basically sucks if you want to measure network up time. Would two 30-second calls that failed with 30 min sampling be recorded as 1 min of downtime or 1 hour? Either guess would be a bad one, not enough information.
The charts in the linked article didn't say the service was down 5.2%. What it says is call completion failed 5.2% of the time. You can't extrapolate the call completion to determine network availability.
They made a call every 30 mins. If the the VOIP network was down for 20 mins it would still show one missed call. If it wasn't down but the call would have gone through if re-attempted 15 seconds later it would still show as one missed call.
And for calls that that were made, what was the phone provider at the other end? Was there a comparison between say a Vonage-to-Vonage call vs a Vonage-to-POTS call? If the phone network test was calling POTS to POTS, then you'd have to do Vonage to Vonage for comparison. If the VOIP networks are less reliable, is the loss in the IP part or the connection to the POTS line at the other end?
The real test of VOIP would be for in-network calls. Connections to the outside POTS network are at the mercy of the carriers, the competition.
We already have seen examples of ISPs screwing with VOIP providers and the phone networks don't like the VOIP competition either.
Interesting study, but the report in the article is sorely lacking in necessary data.
I was curious to see if the linked article referred to "terran tornados". Nope.
There's a reference to "terrestrial dustdevils", that's close.
I would have been surprised to see sci-fi jargon in the middle of a NASA report.
I agree completely. Given how much green screen or CG is done these days in "live action" movies, we need a definition of the term.
"Team America: World Police" had a cinematographer who also did all of the "Matrix" movies. He commented on the DVD how exciting it was to shoot a real movie, with stunts and effect done in front of the camera instead of all green screens.
When a movie featuring marionettes is more "Live" than one with humans, you know we need a new definition.
The Academy will need to decided sometime if "Titanic 2" is so much CG that it falls in the animated feature category.
Google just won a judgement on variations of Google spelling in domain names. After a few thousand new domains get registered, watch for Moby to go after everyone.
I've already synced my SonyEricsson bluetooth cell phone with iCal and the address book on my Mac. So if the iTunes can sync, so should these things.
Add something similar to Salling Clicker as well and the phone is now a remote for the Mac. http://www.salling.com/ Since this doesn't currently work with Motorola
Finally, since I have a charger for my cell phone that can plug into a USB port for power, include a dock that provides syncing and power ( though BT syncing should still be possible.)
Apple had said no PDA, but a modern phone has Contact Manager, Caledar, Camera and Voice. Improve the music player and it could be a slick package.
I liked the asphalt comment. I've been saying for years that with everyone jumping on the bandwagon that internet over water lines was bound to come.
Only downside is that if you start downloading/serving a massive bittorrent someone taking a shower is liable to get a blast of cold water.
There is someone doing it over gas lines. They're running RF contained in the line.
http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000230043258/
A few years back someone else was running fibre via sewer pipes.
Yes, the public use aspect is what they ruled on. In the previous interpretation, it was the public who got the property. (roads, public buildings, dams ) In the recent case they allowed a local government to take the property from one person and gave it to another who bribed them with more tax revenue. The previously accepted definition would NOT call this a case of eminent domain. The majority ruled that "public use" is no longer the standard, but "public purpose". Seizing the property and transferring it another private party offering greater tax revenue was deemed sufficient to call this instance "public purpose".
Fair compensation should not even come up. If I steal your car, but leave a check for high bluebook taped to your garage door there wouldn't be a discussion if the amount was sufficient. For property to pass from one indivudal to another there should be some agreement.
The surpreme court is supposed to rule on constitutionality. They screwed the pooch on the the eminent domain one. O'Conner summed it up well:
"Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random," O'Connor wrote. "The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms."
While I guess some might construe the "eminent domain" ruling to be a "victory" for states rights, I don't quite see it that way.
In the recent medical marijuana case and "out of state wine purchases" case the SCOTUS took the control out from the states and gave it to the federal government. Yes, technically they ruled that the federal gov't already had control, but the result was less state control.
In the eminent domain case they took the rights from the individual to his property and gave it to the government. While they didn't rule that the constitution prohibited this, it was still a case of control moving up hill, away from individuals.
So IMHO, I wouldn't call that a benefit for states rights, but a continuation on the theme of rights and control moving farther away from the individual. Additionally, I don't think the eminent domain case means the states the only one who can wrest property from the owners, I'm sure the federal gov't could do it as well. All they ruled was the individual is not the master of their domain ( no Seinfeld joke )
So if the gov't wants your property, even if the reason is that some other person "bribed" them with the promise of more taxes, there's nothing you can do but stand there holding your... ( Seinfeld joke here )
It's $20 a year, not $20 a month, $10 less than what the used to charge for the paid version.
This kinda misses the point. Connecting a VOIP to a POTS doesn't do anything to get your cell phone calls connected.
A cable between the phone and PC running Skype is too narrow of a focus. The "home version" rather than someone trying to make a service buisness out of sounds better.
Give me a bluetooth adapter than plugs into my POTS phone jack and communicates with the phone. This could be a regular phone line, or VOIP like Vonage. Then I can call out via link, or have incoming calls get transferred as well. As far as the cell company is concerned, I'm making a bunch of calls to the wife.
Incoming should be fairly easy, all incoming calls to the home line get sent to a pre-configured number in the home cell phone. Outbound might be trickier since you'd have to tell the home cell phone what number to dial out.
I'm sure it's coming soon, but a Skype-only solution that takes a cable, that's not all that exciting