make it less expensive to use the Internet during quiet periods than during peak usage periods... the profit motive would encourage ISPs to increase their bandwidth
If you've looked at the graphs Netflix released, at least one ISP is almost always at peak usage. That's a lot of profit if they don't bother to spend money upgrading the bandwidth.
What I fully expect to happen is that Comcast, who has made plenty of profit vastly overselling the consumer end of the pipe, will now make plenty more profit overselling the content end of the pipe, and when Netflix starts stuttering again, they'll get the tried and true "up to" excuse employed by ISPs for years.
So making the road wider won't make traffic on the freeway flow better in the long run
That sounds like an excuse the ISP would use for not building any new lanes and turning the existing lanes into the "fast" lanes. Are you arguing against me or for me?
My question is, will Internet subscribers who don't need Netflix get the opportunity to lower their costs by refusing to pay for the "fast lane"?
Of course! After Netflix paid off Comcast, Comcast lowered their prices for everyone and Netflix raised theirs, so the people not using Netflix got cheaper service and the people using Netflix get to pay more.
Oh wait, Comcast never lowered their prices, but Netflix got more expensive. So I guess the subscribers who don't need netflix at least don't have to pay more for shitty service.
No person in their right mind would walk around with these things just to not be recorded.
No person in their right mind would expect to be recorded everywhere they go (unless they were being chased by paparazzi), sadly "reasonable expectation" isn't defined by people in their right minds.
Why would you ever venture to the edge of Google's network when you can upload your Google Glass videos to YouTube and store your data on Google Drive and read your Google Mail and keep up-to-date with Google News while keeping in touch with your friends on Google+ and chilling with them on Google Hangouts (which you scheduled on Google Calendar) and using Google Search to find more Google things to Google.
If you need to leave the house, Google Maps will be there to help.
Except that with AT&T's 300mbps "giga"power, we'll tell you we're shipping your Lamborghini right away, but it's actually a Honda with a giant spoiler bolted on and a racing stripe sticker.
Guessing someone's password is not hacking. Especially if it's a yahoo user who probably thought it would be hilarious to use "assword" after they were told they couldn't have "password".
AT&T is only worth $189 billion as of today. So what did they do with that $200 billion they supposedly got?
The "AT&T" whose stock you are looking at now didn't exist in the same form when these subsidies were handed out. SBC and the other bells used the savings from those billions in tax subsidies starting in the 90's and went on an acquisition spree, culminating in AT&T and SBC's merger in 2005.
TL;DR: they gave it to shareholders of Pacific Telesis, Ameritech, New England Telecom, TCI, MediaOne, and themselves.
It's not quite so dire, thanks to cloud computing.
Comcast gets their pound of flesh from netflix, prices go up $1. AT&T demands their pound of flesh from netflix, Verizon, Sprint, Time Warner...
Once you've paid all the trolls, how much is left to pay yourselves?
I'm real curious to see these contracts, too. Once everyone forks over the cash to get into this fast lane, what happens? Is the ISP actually going to guarantee bandwidth for everyone and upgrade to meet the demand, or when your House of Cards episode starts stuttering are they going to say "so sorry" and point to the "up to" in fine print next to the speed?
If rich people cruise by in a slick fast lane, that doesn't necessarily imply the slow lane became "bad" all of a sudden
Given the resistance to upgrading that many of the ISPs have shown for years, I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for those upgrades now. Based on their past behavior when new sources of money come in (such as AT&T's reconstitution from the ashes thanks to a liberal watering of broadband subsidies that didn't actually go towards extending broadband), I expect to see more acquisitions and consolidation in the market rather than spending any of this windfall on capital improvements.
Without infrastructure upgrades to build new lanes, those fast lanes are going to come from shutting down slow lanes.
Just like a malicious client can suck data out of a vulnerable server, the same can work in reverse, though clients tend not to keep an SSL connection open any longer than they need to (unless, it's IMAPS or FTPS or chat or some other application with persistent connections).
If you suck the private key out of a bank webserver's RAM, then perform a MITM attack on the bank users using the bank's own certificate, not only can you get their bank credentials (by them filling in the form and sending it to you), depending on the browser you may or may not be able to suck up other accounts from them (eg user logs into a credit card company site to see their bill, then logs into your fake bank to see if they can pay it).
std::containers don't need to store their size as a separate variable
C strings don't either. It's the protocol that said "hey, rather than null terminating strings, let's put a length byte like Turbo Pascal never went out of style!"
The fun thing is that that design decision has lead to an entire CLASS of SSL bugs (in all stacks, not just openSSL) eg invalid certs validating because of a null byte in the Common Name. And heartbleed was just one more in that heap.
It reads like it was spewed out by a markov chain generator trained on a tiny subset of language to make sure that its rambling stays on topic, but still makes no guarantees that it comes out in English.
Maybe that's what the MK means? I had a look at the other stories on the site:
The issue is these venues value their transactions off of the distributed costs on the exchanges – in addition, if those costs need uprightness, then “darkpool” evaluating will itself be twisted.
Whatsoever it is, the tinkle about the blip demonstrates that individuals are looking at the rover photographs nearly. An imaging master at NASA’s laboratory imparts his hypothesis: An “cosmic beam hit” influenced Curiosity.
Some of the less gibberish articles have writing/editing citations at the bottom, maybe they are generated by a computer then cleaned up afterwards? Others are quite clearly press releases.
Slashdot Mirror
If you've looked at the graphs Netflix released, at least one ISP is almost always at peak usage. That's a lot of profit if they don't bother to spend money upgrading the bandwidth.
What I fully expect to happen is that Comcast, who has made plenty of profit vastly overselling the consumer end of the pipe, will now make plenty more profit overselling the content end of the pipe, and when Netflix starts stuttering again, they'll get the tried and true "up to" excuse employed by ISPs for years.
That sounds like an excuse the ISP would use for not building any new lanes and turning the existing lanes into the "fast" lanes. Are you arguing against me or for me?
Of course! After Netflix paid off Comcast, Comcast lowered their prices for everyone and Netflix raised theirs, so the people not using Netflix got cheaper service and the people using Netflix get to pay more.
Oh wait, Comcast never lowered their prices, but Netflix got more expensive. So I guess the subscribers who don't need netflix at least don't have to pay more for shitty service.
Imagine, if you will, a crowded freeway with two lanes in each direction.
The people cry out: "Make the road wider, so traffic will flow better!"
The roadbuilder says: "Not unless we can make some lanes into toll lanes!"
The people cry out: "Anything, anything you want, just make it faster!"
The next month there are two toll lanes and a muddy ditch in each direction.
going to their local governments and demanding an end to the franchise agreements that have locked them into a crappy duopoly (at best).
Finished That For You.
No person in their right mind would walk around with these things just to not be recorded.
No person in their right mind would expect to be recorded everywhere they go (unless they were being chased by paparazzi), sadly "reasonable expectation" isn't defined by people in their right minds.
I want to get off Mr. Bones Wild Ride!
Yeah, you can't make any judgement about Putin's government until it invades Georgia^WUkraine^Wsome other country!
Why would you ever venture to the edge of Google's network when you can upload your Google Glass videos to YouTube and store your data on Google Drive and read your Google Mail and keep up-to-date with Google News while keeping in touch with your friends on Google+ and chilling with them on Google Hangouts (which you scheduled on Google Calendar) and using Google Search to find more Google things to Google.
If you need to leave the house, Google Maps will be there to help.
A vulnerable server can expose anything in the server process's memory space to the attacker. Obligatory: http://xkcd.com/1354/
Except that with AT&T's 300mbps "giga"power, we'll tell you we're shipping your Lamborghini right away, but it's actually a Honda with a giant spoiler bolted on and a racing stripe sticker.
It was never called "moral hazard". I'm pretty sure it wasn't called "moral depravity" either.
"Motivated Reasoning" is a good term for it though.
Guessing someone's password is not hacking. Especially if it's a yahoo user who probably thought it would be hilarious to use "assword" after they were told they couldn't have "password".
Nobody NEEDS to be pushed down stairs.
They should be shoved.
AT&T is only worth $189 billion as of today. So what did they do with that $200 billion they supposedly got?
The "AT&T" whose stock you are looking at now didn't exist in the same form when these subsidies were handed out. SBC and the other bells used the savings from those billions in tax subsidies starting in the 90's and went on an acquisition spree, culminating in AT&T and SBC's merger in 2005.
TL;DR: they gave it to shareholders of Pacific Telesis, Ameritech, New England Telecom, TCI, MediaOne, and themselves.
Multivac is on it.
It's not quite so dire, thanks to cloud computing.
Comcast gets their pound of flesh from netflix, prices go up $1. AT&T demands their pound of flesh from netflix, Verizon, Sprint, Time Warner...
Once you've paid all the trolls, how much is left to pay yourselves?
I'm real curious to see these contracts, too. Once everyone forks over the cash to get into this fast lane, what happens? Is the ISP actually going to guarantee bandwidth for everyone and upgrade to meet the demand, or when your House of Cards episode starts stuttering are they going to say "so sorry" and point to the "up to" in fine print next to the speed?
I couldn't get to slashdot from home on Uverse or at work on Comcast yesterday, but my Sprint phone worked just fine.
If rich people cruise by in a slick fast lane, that doesn't necessarily imply the slow lane became "bad" all of a sudden
Given the resistance to upgrading that many of the ISPs have shown for years, I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for those upgrades now. Based on their past behavior when new sources of money come in (such as AT&T's reconstitution from the ashes thanks to a liberal watering of broadband subsidies that didn't actually go towards extending broadband), I expect to see more acquisitions and consolidation in the market rather than spending any of this windfall on capital improvements.
Without infrastructure upgrades to build new lanes, those fast lanes are going to come from shutting down slow lanes.
That begs the question, "what is an etymological fallacy"
Since when is it permissible for any government to employ military force against its own (civilian) citizens?
That's just the way it is, some things will never change.
Come to think of it, I recall that there was a case last year in Nevada over exactly that, I wonder how that went?
Just like a malicious client can suck data out of a vulnerable server, the same can work in reverse, though clients tend not to keep an SSL connection open any longer than they need to (unless, it's IMAPS or FTPS or chat or some other application with persistent connections).
If you suck the private key out of a bank webserver's RAM, then perform a MITM attack on the bank users using the bank's own certificate, not only can you get their bank credentials (by them filling in the form and sending it to you), depending on the browser you may or may not be able to suck up other accounts from them (eg user logs into a credit card company site to see their bill, then logs into your fake bank to see if they can pay it).
std::containers don't need to store their size as a separate variable
C strings don't either. It's the protocol that said "hey, rather than null terminating strings, let's put a length byte like Turbo Pascal never went out of style!"
The fun thing is that that design decision has lead to an entire CLASS of SSL bugs (in all stacks, not just openSSL) eg invalid certs validating because of a null byte in the Common Name. And heartbleed was just one more in that heap.
It reads like it was spewed out by a markov chain generator trained on a tiny subset of language to make sure that its rambling stays on topic, but still makes no guarantees that it comes out in English.
Maybe that's what the MK means? I had a look at the other stories on the site:
-- http://www.mkobserver.com/high...
-- http://www.mkobserver.com/nasa...
Some of the less gibberish articles have writing/editing citations at the bottom, maybe they are generated by a computer then cleaned up afterwards? Others are quite clearly press releases.