I understand that ATT&T has pretty much abandoned circuit switching. Hasn't it already written off its entire circuit-switched physical plant?
This FCC decision lets ILECs know they dare not interfere with VOIP.
Quo Vadis?
When will the last circuit switched call in America be made? What will become of all that infrastructure? Or are reports of its death highly exaggerated?
Why doesn't Slashdot get slashdotted? That's not as silly a question as it sounds. I mean I can see when some individual's or some small business's site gets slashdotted. And of course in NYPL's case I'm sure it's gotten press coverage about their new collection from all over the world. But it seems some pretty sizable sites succumb.
But back to my question. Does Slashdot have a mighty server farm that most puny earthlngs cannot match?
What's the largest organization that's ever gotten slashdotted?
I didn't speak to the idea of punishment for crimes at all. But since you brought it up...
The government convicted John Gotti, not "The Mafia" or its other members of the crimes Gotti committed.
The Nuremburg Trials convicted Jodl, von Ribbentrop et. al. not "The Nazi Party" or other party members of the crimes that sent them to the gallows.
Likewise, if Bill Gates ordered the murder of Linus Torvalds becaue he thought Linux posed too grave a threat to Windows, it would be Gates (and anyone who conspired with him) who would be tried, not Microsoft, its employees or shareholders.
If Howard Dean assasinated President Bush it would be he who stood trial, not the entire Democratic Party.
You asked, "And when you enforce punishments, is that taken against the whole group or individuals?"
The answer is, of course, that we hold invididuals responsible for their actions.
The McCain-Feingold Act was an outrageous usurpation of our first amendment rights.
Whether you're left or right, liberal or conservative, fascist or capitalist, if you can read you can understand the plain meaning of the first amendment.
What part of "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." don't they understand?
"Except for any refund elected by Microsoft, YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ANY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, if the Robot wrecks everything you own and KILLS YOUR FREAKIN' KID."
Who besides this guy thinks Google is "notoriously inefficient?"
Anybody? Anybody? Bueller?
Re:um. Apple could make a TiVo clone without TiVo
on
Apple to Buy TiVo?
·
· Score: 1
Flamebait?
Not at all. My point is that Apple buying Tivo would be, as the poster to whom I was replying to pointed out, stupid. It would be really stupid. And it would be almost as stupid as the cases I cited.
Has anyone, anywhere (other than possibly Mark Andreesen & Co.) ever said that AOL got a good deal when they bought Netscape for $4.2 billion?
"Ding dong, the flag is dead! Which old flag? The Broadcast Flag! Ding dong the wicked flag is dead! Wake up - sleepy head, rub your eyes, get out of bed Wake up, the Broadcast Flag is dead! She's gone where the goblins go, Below - below - below. Yo-ho, let's open up and sing and ring the bells out Ding dong the merry-oh, sing it high, sing it low Let them know The Broadcast Flag is dead!"
Yeah, I figured, Lexmark was probably just as bad. I just pulled their name out of a hat to use as an example. I wish there were SOME company who would take the enlightened approach on this issue.
Crap like this is a natural result of printer manufacturers selling the printers themselves as loss-leader prices like $40. They gotta make a buck somewhere, and they've not unreasonably decided to make the money in the cartridges.
What I'd like to see is some also-ran like Lexmark zag while everyone is zigging but taking out two page spreads in newspapers and magazines all over the country that went something like this.
==================
Our Printers Cost More Because We Make Be Fat Profit Margins on Them!
And that's good for you! Those bigger margins mean we can afford to give you better instructions, tech support and warranty service. But most of all, we can charge you a fair price for ink cartridge refills.
Don't buy from unethical scum like Hewlett-Packard. Do business with a company that respects your intelligence and your wallet: Lexmark.
==================
But alas. It will never happen. If Lexmark doesn't already pull the same crap as H-P it will probably will soon. And it has no balls at all.
Obviously by using the term "X10 monkeys" I was referring to X10.com, not an industry standard. Control4 is a direct competitor of theirs, the most impressive I've seen so far.
To save you the effort next time, if I ever refer to "IBM" in future posts I will be referring to IBM Corp., which owns the ibm.com domain, not the entire IBM-compatible computer industry.
I apologize for offending typing monkeys everywhere. Now get back to trying to bang out Shakespeare and leave Slashdot to the upper primates.
I should probably submit this as a seperate story but I'm too lazy. Here's a quote from a story at DigitalJournal.com to remind us what NASA originally promised:
"David Aiken, an associate professor of aerospace engineering at the University of Maryland, worked at the Kennedy Space Center soon after the shuttle program was approved in 1972.
He believes that in hindsight the reusability aspect of the Space Shuttle was grossly overestimated.
'Actually the original mission model had 500 missions in ten years for a fleet of five orbiters. Every orbiter was going to fly every two weeks. The idea was that it would land, you would do 160 hours worth of work on it, that's basically two shifts per day five days a week for two weeks - and then you'd be back on the launch pad ready to launch again,' he says. 'Now it's turned out that it doesn't take 160 hours of time to turn it around again, it probably takes more like 3,000 hours of time.'"
Yeah, yeah, I know all about all of the unknowns that they faced. The pioneers are the ones who get arrows in their chests. But this is ridiculous.
I remember NASA experts and PR flacks saying so glibly how using expendable rockets was like driving across the country and throwing away the car after every trip.
Yeah and maybe shooting a gun is like throwing a really tiny knife and leaving it in the target.
Maybe rocketships aren't like cars. Maybe we would have been way, way better off in terms of cost--and probably human lives--if we had stayed with expendables.
Slashdot Mirror
I understand that ATT&T has pretty much abandoned circuit switching. Hasn't it already written off its entire circuit-switched physical plant?
This FCC decision lets ILECs know they dare not interfere with VOIP.
Quo Vadis?
When will the last circuit switched call in America be made? What will become of all that infrastructure? Or are reports of its death highly exaggerated?
Which reminds, as I reply to myself...
Why doesn't Slashdot get slashdotted? That's not as silly a question as it sounds. I mean I can see when some individual's or some small business's site gets slashdotted. And of course in NYPL's case I'm sure it's gotten press coverage about their new collection from all over the world. But it seems some pretty sizable sites succumb.
But back to my question. Does Slashdot have a mighty server farm that most puny earthlngs cannot match?
What's the largest organization that's ever gotten slashdotted?
Way to go!
Wonder when they'll recover.
I didn't speak to the idea of punishment for crimes at all. But since you brought it up...
The government convicted John Gotti, not "The Mafia" or its other members of the crimes Gotti committed.
The Nuremburg Trials convicted Jodl, von Ribbentrop et. al. not "The Nazi Party" or other party members of the crimes that sent them to the gallows.
Likewise, if Bill Gates ordered the murder of Linus Torvalds becaue he thought Linux posed too grave a threat to Windows, it would be Gates (and anyone who conspired with him) who would be tried, not Microsoft, its employees or shareholders.
If Howard Dean assasinated President Bush it would be he who stood trial, not the entire Democratic Party.
You asked, "And when you enforce punishments, is that taken against the whole group or individuals?"
The answer is, of course, that we hold invididuals responsible for their actions.
Shine on, brother.
So if a bunch of people band together to form a political party to try to take control of the reins of government they presumably remain people?
But if a bunch of people band together to pool their resources (they incorporate) to make a buck, they lose their humanity?
I was overly optimistic. Even the dimmest among us don't get it.
The McCain-Feingold Act was an outrageous usurpation of our first amendment rights.
Whether you're left or right, liberal or conservative, fascist or capitalist, if you can read you can understand the plain meaning of the first amendment.
What part of "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." don't they understand?
"Except for any refund elected by Microsoft, YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ANY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, if the Robot wrecks everything you own and KILLS YOUR FREAKIN' KID."
1) A robot may not use a non-Microsoft product or through inaction, allow a human being to use a non-Microsoft product.
2) A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3) A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
Turn Your Old Hard Drive into a Windchime. Wednesday February 23, @10:39AM
Rejected
And I even included a link to another page on the subject
WTF?
Notorious?
Who besides this guy thinks Google is "notoriously inefficient?"
Anybody? Anybody? Bueller?
Flamebait?
Not at all. My point is that Apple buying Tivo would be, as the poster to whom I was replying to pointed out, stupid. It would be really stupid. And it would be almost as stupid as the cases I cited.
Has anyone, anywhere (other than possibly Mark Andreesen & Co.) ever said that AOL got a good deal when they bought Netscape for $4.2 billion?
I'd love to hear from them.
You are correct sir. My mistake.
Why did IBM but Lotus for THREE POINT FIVE BILLION DOLLARS?
Why did AOL buy Netscape for FOUR POINT TWO BILLION DOLLARS!?!?! (Add more exlamation points and questiosn markes as desired.)
Who KNOWS why these crazy companies do crap like this?
MS wasn't "convicted" of anything. It got sued by the Justice Department. When you settle or lose a lawsuit you don't become a convict.
"Ding dong, the flag is dead!
Which old flag?
The Broadcast Flag!
Ding dong the wicked flag is dead!
Wake up - sleepy head, rub your eyes, get out of bed
Wake up, the Broadcast Flag is dead!
She's gone where the goblins go,
Below - below - below. Yo-ho, let's open up and sing and ring the bells out
Ding dong the merry-oh, sing it high, sing it low
Let them know
The Broadcast Flag is dead!"
Who gets her broom?
"Mozilla Chairman Speaks on Open Source/Microsoft"
Mozilla chairman? Who's he? Ohhh MITCH KAPOR!?!?! The guy who developed Lotus 1-2-3!!!
I can already see a Slashdot headline from 20 years in the future. "Gates Foundation Chairman Speaks at AARP Convention."
I've been getting that too, all morning long. I know it's offtopic but WTF?
Yeah, I figured, Lexmark was probably just as bad. I just pulled their name out of a hat to use as an example. I wish there were SOME company who would take the enlightened approach on this issue.
(sigh) Ain't gonna happen.
Crap like this is a natural result of printer manufacturers selling the printers themselves as loss-leader prices like $40. They gotta make a buck somewhere, and they've not unreasonably decided to make the money in the cartridges.
What I'd like to see is some also-ran like Lexmark zag while everyone is zigging but taking out two page spreads in newspapers and magazines all over the country that went something like this.
==================
Our Printers Cost More Because We Make Be Fat Profit Margins on Them!
And that's good for you! Those bigger margins mean we can afford to give you better instructions, tech support and warranty service. But most of all, we can charge you a fair price for ink cartridge refills.
Don't buy from unethical scum like Hewlett-Packard. Do business with a company that respects your intelligence and your wallet: Lexmark.
==================
But alas. It will never happen. If Lexmark doesn't already pull the same crap as H-P it will probably will soon. And it has no balls at all.
You want me to correct your English?
You meant to write "offering," not "whoring" you ignorant swine. If you don't like the offer, don't take it.
Can this be true? This five year old machine has that kind of processing power?
Microsoft IsNot sane.
Microoft IsNot reasonable.
Microsoft IsNot ethical.
Why shouldn't they get to patent "IsNot"?
Hey Monkey:
Obviously by using the term "X10 monkeys" I was referring to X10.com, not an industry standard. Control4 is a direct competitor of theirs, the most impressive I've seen so far.
To save you the effort next time, if I ever refer to "IBM" in future posts I will be referring to IBM Corp., which owns the ibm.com domain, not the entire IBM-compatible computer industry.
I apologize for offending typing monkeys everywhere. Now get back to trying to bang out Shakespeare and leave Slashdot to the upper primates.
Not only do they look good but you can automate your house WIHTOUT GIVING MONEY TO THOSE X-10 MONKEYS who virtually invented the *#&&$@$ pop-up ad.
Remember them?
I should probably submit this as a seperate story but I'm too lazy. Here's a quote from a story at DigitalJournal.com to remind us what NASA originally promised:
"David Aiken, an associate professor of aerospace engineering at the University of Maryland, worked at the Kennedy Space Center soon after the shuttle program was approved in 1972.
He believes that in hindsight the reusability aspect of the Space Shuttle was grossly overestimated.
'Actually the original mission model had 500 missions in ten years for a fleet of five orbiters. Every orbiter was going to fly every two weeks. The idea was that it would land, you would do 160 hours worth of work on it, that's basically two shifts per day five days a week for two weeks - and then you'd be back on the launch pad ready to launch again,' he says. 'Now it's turned out that it doesn't take 160 hours of time to turn it around again, it probably takes more like 3,000 hours of time.'"
Yeah, yeah, I know all about all of the unknowns that they faced. The pioneers are the ones who get arrows in their chests. But this is ridiculous.
I remember NASA experts and PR flacks saying so glibly how using expendable rockets was like driving across the country and throwing away the car after every trip.
Yeah and maybe shooting a gun is like throwing a really tiny knife and leaving it in the target.
Maybe rocketships aren't like cars. Maybe we would have been way, way better off in terms of cost--and probably human lives--if we had stayed with expendables.