Then why is it that most college graduates in this country are in debt up to their earballs in student loans?
The sub-assistant to the assistant vice night dean of the electron subdepartment of the atom department of the molecular department of the physics department needs to hire a third receptionist. God forbid he be asked to share staff with the vice vice morning shift subdean of subtraction.
and they can and should make their own decision and live with the consequences of such.
Takes two to tango. Uber's management has to do the same. If someone pushes the button on their phone and nobody comes to pick them up, then Uber is done.
For someone who wants the government out of everything, you certainly seem to run screaming and crying to the government a lot.
A customer of theirs - lawsuit
For what? Can you find in your contract where Comcast promises to answer your DNS queries correctly?
A customer of a paying peer - lawsuit from the peer
On what grounds would that peer have to sue Comcast? All traffic being sent to the peer would be unmodified traffic direct from Comcast's customer to whatever IP the customer is transmitting to.
A custom of a settlement free peer - possible lawsuit from peer, risk of ending settlement free peering.
Again, for what? All traffic is being sent unmodified from Comcast's customer to whatever IP that customer is transmitting to.
The DNS redirection on its own would be grounds for a lawsuit
You've got me there. Pizza Hut would probably have grounds to sue for trademark infringement, the question remains whether they can out-lawyer Comcast.
One way would be to send Pizza Hut a bill for $1,000,000. Then, if they don't pay, you set your DNS servers to resolve pizzahut.com to the IP of someone who will pay. Also, redirect all DNS packets to 8.8.8.8 or whatever other DNS services to your own in order to guarantee that the 99.999% of the customers not using a hosts file to resolve pizzahut.com will get pizzas from the company that paid.
Don't worry, we'll let you drive on the self-driving car test tracks, complete with the random obstacles the self-driving cars are supposed to face, like a schoolbus full of orphaned future cancer-curing researchers magically appearing 3 feet in front of you, while a whole fleet of grannies just happen to wander out into the other lane from an alternate plane of existence.
Actually, it's highly likely that there'll be places you can "go for a leisurely drive". I'm looking forward to that because it certainly beats the fuck out of the status quo where i'm stuck behind an asshole "going for a leisurely drive" at 10 miles under the speed limit because they've got fuck all to do with their time.
Sure. I'm sure Comcast has had long and protracted discussions with Level 3 during those contract renegotiations. Heck, one time, the internet got cut in half for 3 days over these negotiations.
Some ISPs are simply peers, but others are decidedly "downstream" from others and receive a lot more traffic from others, than they push out.
OK, so having signed the contract now they those "downstream" ISPs are free to ignore it? Be sure to use terms like "forced to sign a contract they didn't understand" or "signed a contract they couldn't afford" I hear that gains extra sympathy points from conservatives.
why am I paying the same per month as the folks who
Because you signed up for the same package they did and signed a contract that said you would. You can ask the cable company if they offer a granny package for someone who just wants to check their email, and if they don't offer you one, you could switch to an ISP (likely wireless) that does. I personally use Ting for my mobile wireless, mostly since I basically use mobile wireless for navigation and nothing else. Total bill runs around $15/mo depending on whether someone texts me or not.
But now I struggle to understand, why it was perfectly fine with the likes of you, that some TV-channels are free
Because they're ad supported?
some cable-channels are "free" (bundled with subscription)
So, not free.
and yet others charge extra?
Do you even know what the cable model is? The cable companies pay for the right to retransmit all of these channels. Some of them, like broadcast TV, are cheap. Others like HBO are very expensive, so the cable company bills the customer that wants HBO. Bringing the cable model to the internet would mean that Google could charge Comcast $x/subscriber for Comcast to allow their subscribers to access Google's content, then the cable company would pass those charges along to the user, likely using the same kind of packages. Get the Amazon package for $5/mo for access to Amazon -- and all of the tens of thousands of websites hosted on EC2, just like how the HSN channel gets bundled with whatever other channels owned by the same company.
BTW, that option also sounds like bullshit to me, because as much as it's great having 450 channels with nothing on, I can probably assemble a list of several hundred websites I use on a monthly basis, all of which would have to be somehow packaged, and someone else will need an entirely different package because they have to go to different websites to pay their bills.
The threat that I'm going to force you to reply to me. Oh no, sorry, I mean
So there's going to have to be some mechanism for these people who use these pipes to pay for the portion they're using.
Which, by the way, they are paying for. By paying their ISPs, that pay for the difference in data usage at the peering points according to established contracts. So it's totally an imaginary threat, or at least a pointless threat (just like my threat I'd force you to reply to me, which you already had).
Unless, of course, Edward Whitacre was talking about some other "mechanism", after all he is referring to the future in "going to have to be". Then the question is whether or not a threat is "imaginary" just because it didn't happen. If you threaten to do something and your threat creates a massive public backlash that leads to the threat of government action if you follow through with it, do you get to go back and say "it waz just a prank!!1!" and retroactively declare it "imaginary"?
Also you have interface complexity. Adding these features requires some way to use the features, possibly including configuration options, menu items, hotkeys and so on. Prior to the Ribbon, Microsoft tried to fix this in Word by hiding all the menu items you had not used yet, so you'd never know those features were there to be used. My boss constantly asks me to remove menu items and "simplify" but he never has any answers on where he thinks users should go to access those features if they're no longer in the menu. Relevant Dilbert.
Except that every time CloudFlare has been notified, they have disabled the content that they were notified about, as required by the DMCA, unless you have evidence that they are not complying with the DMCA (which the MPAA and RIAA don't or they'd have marched straight to the courthouse to put an end to it rather than paying people to whine about it online).
Look, I get it, the MPAA/RIAA bribed the fuck out of the Democrats to get the DMCA and now you feel like the law they bought isn't working and they should get a refund. But guess what! It's the law until it's replaced.
Now, the question is whether you think you can replace the law with one where they should use psychic power to determine whether or not a given file would be found to be infringing by a court and block that file if so. If you think a law like that is going to fly, well, I'm sure the Democrats have their donation slots WIDE open for 2018.
I start by using my knowledge of whatever it is that I expect to receive to pick a reasonable size starting chunk, say if I'm expecting to receive a line of text from an IRC client, maybe bufsize=256;. Then, if I read 256 bytes and don't receive a newline, I double the buffer size and read another 256 bytes. If I still haven't received a newline, I double the buffer size and read 512 bytes and so on. The realloc() system call allows me to (attempt to) extend the buffer, so it does not have a fixed length.
You don't know the length of the input until you have read it in. To read it in you need a buffer, that buffer will have a fixed length.
realloc() says hi. You can read()bufsize bytes from your source, determine if you have reached the end of input, and if not, allocate more memory for your buffer and continue to read() some more.
so the obvious solution is to expand the pool. Diversity, H1B, education programmes...
Or, by paying more. The other day I was reading an article about some construction company whining that they couldn't keep their workers because another company kept driving by their job site with a big sign saying they were paying more. The first company absolutely believed they were entitled to workers at the rate they were paying, and that everyone else should bend over backwards to ensure they got what they wanted.
Paying more worked just fine for the company with the sign.
The most anti-free speech action you could ever take would be to require private entities (not government)
The most anti-free speech action you could ever take would be to turn a blind eye to censorship by private entities, then feign shock when it turns out the government encouraged that censorship.
This isn't a theoretical thing either, we saw it with Bush's administration withholding government contracts from Qwest over refusing to participate in (at that time illegal) warrantless wiretapping (and then arresting the CEO for financial statements that had been made, that were no longer correct after the withdrawal of the government contracts).
any attempt to abuse market power will lead to Amazon being uncompetitive in the market
As long as you only define "abuse market power" as "charge too much".
Just a minute, I'm getting new orders from Bezos... if I want to keep buying products from Amazon, I need to park my car to block you in whenever possible.
What about the stuff made on the same exact production line as the "official" stuff?
You mean the ones that run 3 shifts 24x7 making official stuff? I suspect what you're getting isn't made on the same exact production line, or if it was, it came from the QA reject bin.
who says that as a business you have some sort of a right not to have competition?
Nobody does, but we haven't even gotten to market yet, we're still discussing the relative costs and benefits of our staffing decisions. As it stands the opportunity cost of choosing to hire humans over purchasing robots seems to be quite high. Maybe you can "compete on the fact that you hire humans", ask the "Buy American" people how that worked for them?
automation is not an immediate thing
Neither is hiring a human, they will have to be trained in whatever innovative process you've dreamed up. Except that every human you hire will have to be trained, while the robot would be trained once and that programming replicated as many times as necessary.
So it will run at reduced efficiency and productivity compared to a robot-staffed company because hiring three shifts of workers plus spares for each position is less capital-intensive than buying a robot for each position? Keeping in mind, of course, that robot-built-robots will theoretically be as inexpensive as everything else robot-built (ie cost of raw materials plus whatever margin the bot owners can eke out as profit), plus the added overhead of having to outfit your place of work for human occupation eg lights, bathrooms, potable water, etc.
As for "processes", at this point, just about any assembly process is well understood and well automated. The ones that aren't are waiting for computer vision to finish baking. Which, like everything else, will remain 5-10 years in the future until one day it isn't.
I really don't think plumbers are going anywhere anytime soon either.
Someone will eventually miniaturize the oil-pipe cleaning pigs to fit in household plumbing and sell you a $450 poomba. Pays for itself in just a few $100/hr plumber calls.
Slashdot Mirror
The sub-assistant to the assistant vice night dean of the electron subdepartment of the atom department of the molecular department of the physics department needs to hire a third receptionist. God forbid he be asked to share staff with the vice vice morning shift subdean of subtraction.
How does one get screenshots of a private Facebook group?
Takes two to tango. Uber's management has to do the same. If someone pushes the button on their phone and nobody comes to pick them up, then Uber is done.
For someone who wants the government out of everything, you certainly seem to run screaming and crying to the government a lot.
For what? Can you find in your contract where Comcast promises to answer your DNS queries correctly?
On what grounds would that peer have to sue Comcast? All traffic being sent to the peer would be unmodified traffic direct from Comcast's customer to whatever IP the customer is transmitting to.
Again, for what? All traffic is being sent unmodified from Comcast's customer to whatever IP that customer is transmitting to.
You've got me there. Pizza Hut would probably have grounds to sue for trademark infringement, the question remains whether they can out-lawyer Comcast.
Comcast's use of Sandvine (and lying about it)
Verizon's throttling of Netflix (and lying about it)
There's almost certainly others, but those are the big ones that blew up once their lies were caught.
One way would be to send Pizza Hut a bill for $1,000,000. Then, if they don't pay, you set your DNS servers to resolve pizzahut.com to the IP of someone who will pay. Also, redirect all DNS packets to 8.8.8.8 or whatever other DNS services to your own in order to guarantee that the 99.999% of the customers not using a hosts file to resolve pizzahut.com will get pizzas from the company that paid.
Don't worry, we'll let you drive on the self-driving car test tracks, complete with the random obstacles the self-driving cars are supposed to face, like a schoolbus full of orphaned future cancer-curing researchers magically appearing 3 feet in front of you, while a whole fleet of grannies just happen to wander out into the other lane from an alternate plane of existence.
Actually, it's highly likely that there'll be places you can "go for a leisurely drive". I'm looking forward to that because it certainly beats the fuck out of the status quo where i'm stuck behind an asshole "going for a leisurely drive" at 10 miles under the speed limit because they've got fuck all to do with their time.
Sure. I'm sure Comcast has had long and protracted discussions with Level 3 during those contract renegotiations. Heck, one time, the internet got cut in half for 3 days over these negotiations.
OK, so having signed the contract now they those "downstream" ISPs are free to ignore it? Be sure to use terms like "forced to sign a contract they didn't understand" or "signed a contract they couldn't afford" I hear that gains extra sympathy points from conservatives.
Because you signed up for the same package they did and signed a contract that said you would. You can ask the cable company if they offer a granny package for someone who just wants to check their email, and if they don't offer you one, you could switch to an ISP (likely wireless) that does. I personally use Ting for my mobile wireless, mostly since I basically use mobile wireless for navigation and nothing else. Total bill runs around $15/mo depending on whether someone texts me or not.
Because they're ad supported?
So, not free.
Do you even know what the cable model is? The cable companies pay for the right to retransmit all of these channels. Some of them, like broadcast TV, are cheap. Others like HBO are very expensive, so the cable company bills the customer that wants HBO. Bringing the cable model to the internet would mean that Google could charge Comcast $x/subscriber for Comcast to allow their subscribers to access Google's content, then the cable company would pass those charges along to the user, likely using the same kind of packages. Get the Amazon package for $5/mo for access to Amazon -- and all of the tens of thousands of websites hosted on EC2, just like how the HSN channel gets bundled with whatever other channels owned by the same company.
BTW, that option also sounds like bullshit to me, because as much as it's great having 450 channels with nothing on, I can probably assemble a list of several hundred websites I use on a monthly basis, all of which would have to be somehow packaged, and someone else will need an entirely different package because they have to go to different websites to pay their bills.
The threat that I'm going to force you to reply to me. Oh no, sorry, I mean
Which, by the way, they are paying for. By paying their ISPs, that pay for the difference in data usage at the peering points according to established contracts. So it's totally an imaginary threat, or at least a pointless threat (just like my threat I'd force you to reply to me, which you already had).
Unless, of course, Edward Whitacre was talking about some other "mechanism", after all he is referring to the future in "going to have to be". Then the question is whether or not a threat is "imaginary" just because it didn't happen. If you threaten to do something and your threat creates a massive public backlash that leads to the threat of government action if you follow through with it, do you get to go back and say "it waz just a prank!!1!" and retroactively declare it "imaginary"?
So SBC's CEO was an imaginary CEO?
and then the excavator becomes radioactive and you have to dispose of it too.
So they'll finally shut down pizzerias for selling "cheese pizza" which, as we all know, is a code word for child porn?
Also you have interface complexity. Adding these features requires some way to use the features, possibly including configuration options, menu items, hotkeys and so on. Prior to the Ribbon, Microsoft tried to fix this in Word by hiding all the menu items you had not used yet, so you'd never know those features were there to be used. My boss constantly asks me to remove menu items and "simplify" but he never has any answers on where he thinks users should go to access those features if they're no longer in the menu. Relevant Dilbert.
Except that every time CloudFlare has been notified, they have disabled the content that they were notified about, as required by the DMCA, unless you have evidence that they are not complying with the DMCA (which the MPAA and RIAA don't or they'd have marched straight to the courthouse to put an end to it rather than paying people to whine about it online).
Look, I get it, the MPAA/RIAA bribed the fuck out of the Democrats to get the DMCA and now you feel like the law they bought isn't working and they should get a refund. But guess what! It's the law until it's replaced.
Now, the question is whether you think you can replace the law with one where they should use psychic power to determine whether or not a given file would be found to be infringing by a court and block that file if so. If you think a law like that is going to fly, well, I'm sure the Democrats have their donation slots WIDE open for 2018.
I start by using my knowledge of whatever it is that I expect to receive to pick a reasonable size starting chunk, say if I'm expecting to receive a line of text from an IRC client, maybe bufsize=256;. Then, if I read 256 bytes and don't receive a newline, I double the buffer size and read another 256 bytes. If I still haven't received a newline, I double the buffer size and read 512 bytes and so on. The realloc() system call allows me to (attempt to) extend the buffer, so it does not have a fixed length.
It seems to me that the obvious test to see whether or not AlphaGo "understands" Go or not would be to have it try to play on a 21x21 grid.
realloc() says hi. You can read() bufsize bytes from your source, determine if you have reached the end of input, and if not, allocate more memory for your buffer and continue to read() some more.
Uh, no. In case you haven't missed it, they WERE the first jobs shipped overseas last decade when that became a popular thing to do.
Or, by paying more. The other day I was reading an article about some construction company whining that they couldn't keep their workers because another company kept driving by their job site with a big sign saying they were paying more. The first company absolutely believed they were entitled to workers at the rate they were paying, and that everyone else should bend over backwards to ensure they got what they wanted.
Paying more worked just fine for the company with the sign.
The most anti-free speech action you could ever take would be to turn a blind eye to censorship by private entities, then feign shock when it turns out the government encouraged that censorship.
This isn't a theoretical thing either, we saw it with Bush's administration withholding government contracts from Qwest over refusing to participate in (at that time illegal) warrantless wiretapping (and then arresting the CEO for financial statements that had been made, that were no longer correct after the withdrawal of the government contracts).
As long as you only define "abuse market power" as "charge too much".
Just a minute, I'm getting new orders from Bezos... if I want to keep buying products from Amazon, I need to park my car to block you in whenever possible.
You mean the ones that run 3 shifts 24x7 making official stuff? I suspect what you're getting isn't made on the same exact production line, or if it was, it came from the QA reject bin.
Nobody does, but we haven't even gotten to market yet, we're still discussing the relative costs and benefits of our staffing decisions. As it stands the opportunity cost of choosing to hire humans over purchasing robots seems to be quite high. Maybe you can "compete on the fact that you hire humans", ask the "Buy American" people how that worked for them?
Neither is hiring a human, they will have to be trained in whatever innovative process you've dreamed up. Except that every human you hire will have to be trained, while the robot would be trained once and that programming replicated as many times as necessary.
So it will run at reduced efficiency and productivity compared to a robot-staffed company because hiring three shifts of workers plus spares for each position is less capital-intensive than buying a robot for each position? Keeping in mind, of course, that robot-built-robots will theoretically be as inexpensive as everything else robot-built (ie cost of raw materials plus whatever margin the bot owners can eke out as profit), plus the added overhead of having to outfit your place of work for human occupation eg lights, bathrooms, potable water, etc.
As for "processes", at this point, just about any assembly process is well understood and well automated. The ones that aren't are waiting for computer vision to finish baking. Which, like everything else, will remain 5-10 years in the future until one day it isn't.
Someone will eventually miniaturize the oil-pipe cleaning pigs to fit in household plumbing and sell you a $450 poomba. Pays for itself in just a few $100/hr plumber calls.