yeah, yeah, Windows is really a threat to Linux and Apple. What memo do you failed the ones using Linux and Mac are using it because they want a quality product, and the ones that want to keep cost down "pirate" it? I don't see a threat anywhere. Anyway, Microsoft can't have the luxury of giving free upgrades because they don't sell hardware. Only if it is free upgrades for the surface, but nobody on his right mind buys a surface to run linux...
And I didn't say it...it is obvious they want small that caps because they are scared shitless the new generations don't want anything to have with TV, and the older generations are streaming everything.
Data caps have their places, however they have to be fair. For instance a data cap between lets say 100GB-500GB for residential user is totally fair, in 2013. Despite what people or consumers may claim, Internet, just like water, gas or electricity is a business model where costs are kept down because the global capacity available to the provider is overselled, specially to residencial customers. Both the grid and the facilities don't have the capacity to sustain everyone requesting the full capacity at full times. The capacities sold to residential customers are not guaranteed at all times, and the contract says rightly so. You want it, you pay for it, instead of 20-40 euros per month, you pay 100-1000 Euros and you get what you need if you are a medium-large business, or have specific SLA needs for instance. That is the business model despite how many times you cry and say otherwise in slashdot, don't fool yourself.
I have no idea why this was modded insightful. There is maintenance, for starters, but that is no the point rebuking this. It may not have an extra cost to the customer. However, Internet, just like water, gas or electricity is a business model where costs are kept down because the global capacity available to the provider is overselled, specially to residencial customers. Both the grid and the facilities don't have the capacity to sustain everyone requesting the full capacity at full times. And yes, the amount of data has a cost, that has to be factored and forecasted to keep customers happy, and investments are to be made to upgrade it from time to time.
This is old reasoning. The flaw in your logic is that nowadays you have people running 24 h/services, businesses at day with employees (ab)using the bandwidth, people at night seeing TV and streaming and people maxing out their connection 24 hours downloading stuff. The p2p technology changed the landscape of usage. I was working in the time there was the tipping point, and we changed from being able to tell with a naked eye, the difference between night and day, to have mostly a flat line.
you tell me mobster have encrypted lines and software for talking, and head of states just talk about sensitive matters over the phone like us, common people?
Well, there is a lot of medical tourism, families of UK residents and everything, to take advantage of the system. As a foreign UK student, I was very surprised I had rights to consultations and medication for free, without me and my family ever contributing a single dime to the system. And the proper filters, and better usage of resources. I had a GP consultation for free without talking with a much cheaper proxy beforehand, like, a nurse, you know.
Or wifi interference, back at my home channel 1 is quite impossible to use due to some unknown interference (mobile towers?). Also DNS proxied by domestic routers of several brands are insanely slow, you are much better if you configure directly the ISP DNS or google public DNS 8.8.8.8.
I can't be bothered and I refuse to do it. Lets point it out I am not demanding they take them offline, I just vote my clicks, or rather the absence of them. If you want customers like me, devise a less intrusive way. And I don't really care what you think about it.
I use ad blocking, refuse to see any video at all that starts with ads, and even use filters for facebook and linked.in. Actually facebook and youtube are extremely annoying without filters in the browser.
Would they be allowed to do it? Dude, we are talking about a protocol in which an american citizen was wanted for years by the FBI for writing and distributing an implementation.
PGP by definition has to have an element of trust unknown for 3rd players, i.e. the private keys. If gmail implemented it, it was almost the same as not having it. and I certainly wouldn't see the point of using it. The point of using it on your side, in a TRANSPARENT method, is for google not be able to access your private messages too. Note, you don't have to be an expert, the installation of the tools have just to be simple enough. After exchange keys, the software is smart enough to know when you are sending messages for people with you haven't exchanged keys (yet), or for people with keys on the store, and automatically encrypts that conversations. So yes, transparent, but on YOUR side. In the past, people would say only typists would write document and nowadays people with Word write documents too.
I did say they shouldt. The question is that they are too broad, and there is both a technical and political conflict between them and security. There has to be a balance, and often that doesnt happen because it is the easier course of action.
There are PGP plug-ins for Chrome and Mail in Mac, at least. Why not exchange PGP keys with the family? I have used the gpgtools in the past in my Mac, and it is much pretty easy to install and use then.
Slashdot Mirror
yeah, yeah, Windows is really a threat to Linux and Apple. What memo do you failed the ones using Linux and Mac are using it because they want a quality product, and the ones that want to keep cost down "pirate" it? I don't see a threat anywhere. Anyway, Microsoft can't have the luxury of giving free upgrades because they don't sell hardware. Only if it is free upgrades for the surface, but nobody on his right mind buys a surface to run linux...
And I didn't say it...it is obvious they want small that caps because they are scared shitless the new generations don't want anything to have with TV, and the older generations are streaming everything.
Data caps have their places, however they have to be fair. For instance a data cap between lets say 100GB-500GB for residential user is totally fair, in 2013. Despite what people or consumers may claim, Internet, just like water, gas or electricity is a business model where costs are kept down because the global capacity available to the provider is overselled, specially to residencial customers. Both the grid and the facilities don't have the capacity to sustain everyone requesting the full capacity at full times. The capacities sold to residential customers are not guaranteed at all times, and the contract says rightly so. You want it, you pay for it, instead of 20-40 euros per month, you pay 100-1000 Euros and you get what you need if you are a medium-large business, or have specific SLA needs for instance. That is the business model despite how many times you cry and say otherwise in slashdot, don't fool yourself.
I have no idea why this was modded insightful. There is maintenance, for starters, but that is no the point rebuking this. It may not have an extra cost to the customer. However, Internet, just like water, gas or electricity is a business model where costs are kept down because the global capacity available to the provider is overselled, specially to residencial customers. Both the grid and the facilities don't have the capacity to sustain everyone requesting the full capacity at full times. And yes, the amount of data has a cost, that has to be factored and forecasted to keep customers happy, and investments are to be made to upgrade it from time to time.
This is old reasoning. The flaw in your logic is that nowadays you have people running 24 h/services, businesses at day with employees (ab)using the bandwidth, people at night seeing TV and streaming and people maxing out their connection 24 hours downloading stuff. The p2p technology changed the landscape of usage. I was working in the time there was the tipping point, and we changed from being able to tell with a naked eye, the difference between night and day, to have mostly a flat line.
you tell me mobster have encrypted lines and software for talking, and head of states just talk about sensitive matters over the phone like us, common people?
Time to close your facebook account?
A girl in slashdot, is that possible? ;-P
Well, there is a lot of medical tourism, families of UK residents and everything, to take advantage of the system. As a foreign UK student, I was very surprised I had rights to consultations and medication for free, without me and my family ever contributing a single dime to the system. And the proper filters, and better usage of resources. I had a GP consultation for free without talking with a much cheaper proxy beforehand, like, a nurse, you know.
Or wifi interference, back at my home channel 1 is quite impossible to use due to some unknown interference (mobile towers?). Also DNS proxied by domestic routers of several brands are insanely slow, you are much better if you configure directly the ISP DNS or google public DNS 8.8.8.8.
More often than not, slowness can be due to the DNS relayed by the house routers being *really* slow. Try to setup 8.8.8.8 as your DNS server.
The slowness likely is because using DNS relayed from routers is a crappy business. Setup your preferred DNS server as 8.8.8.8 and presto!
Yup. I second that, when expert exchange links come up in my google search, I don't even bother to click them.
Brilliant, sir, brilliant. You made my day.
You surely jest. Corruption in Africa? And Microsoft involved? Cant surely be true!
You don't get it. Besides wasting my time, what specific duty is set out that I have to pay the bandwidth and the equipment to watch that advert?
I can't be bothered and I refuse to do it. Lets point it out I am not demanding they take them offline, I just vote my clicks, or rather the absence of them. If you want customers like me, devise a less intrusive way. And I don't really care what you think about it.
I use ad blocking, refuse to see any video at all that starts with ads, and even use filters for facebook and linked.in. Actually facebook and youtube are extremely annoying without filters in the browser.
So you are saying Microsoft needs an exploit and that they would be able to program any backdoor they wanted. Does it even makes sense?
I have exactly this problem, the Mac can access youtube videos which I cannot see in the iPad and Apple TV.
Would they be allowed to do it? Dude, we are talking about a protocol in which an american citizen was wanted for years by the FBI for writing and distributing an implementation.
PGP by definition has to have an element of trust unknown for 3rd players, i.e. the private keys. If gmail implemented it, it was almost the same as not having it. and I certainly wouldn't see the point of using it. The point of using it on your side, in a TRANSPARENT method, is for google not be able to access your private messages too. Note, you don't have to be an expert, the installation of the tools have just to be simple enough. After exchange keys, the software is smart enough to know when you are sending messages for people with you haven't exchanged keys (yet), or for people with keys on the store, and automatically encrypts that conversations. So yes, transparent, but on YOUR side. In the past, people would say only typists would write document and nowadays people with Word write documents too.
I did say they shouldt. The question is that they are too broad, and there is both a technical and political conflict between them and security. There has to be a balance, and often that doesnt happen because it is the easier course of action.
Are they outlawing it too?
There are PGP plug-ins for Chrome and Mail in Mac, at least. Why not exchange PGP keys with the family? I have used the gpgtools in the past in my Mac, and it is much pretty easy to install and use then.