I dumped my satellite service over a year ago. I don't have cable either. I have FiOS but only for the Internet. My Internet connection is 150 megabits down and 50 megabits up. I've measured it many times and the throughput actually seems more like 155/65 so I cannot complain to Verizon.
I've had Netflix for about 5 years. Aside from a VCR/DVD player, I've also got a Roku box, an Apple TV (first gen and hacked), an iPad2, a computer (Ubuntu/Win7), a Wii, and an antenna (which I never use) connected to my living room TV.
The streaming quality from Apple is not bad. The resolution is 1080p but the frame rate is not so great. This becomes really apparent during scenes where the camera pans. Overall the Apple TV performance is good. Amazon video is not quite as good as Netflix. They seem to compress more and they have less HD content. I can stream Netflix from my Wii, Roku, or the computer. The Wii is only 480p so we will not talk about that. The Roku (720p) and computer (1080p) performance is variable. On a good day the pictures are sharp and vibrant. On a typical day there will be some pixelation while playing movies. This has become worse and worse over time. I've checked my network when this happens and it's always fine.
My conclusion is that the Netflix issue is due to a bottleneck on the remote end or somewhere in the middle. Either Netflix does not have a sufficiently wide pipe, or Verizon is traffic shaping somewhere near their backbone. Another alternative is that Neflix is just compressing the content as much as they can until a certain percentage of subscribers complain.
Anyway I don't miss the satellite bills. I've got two kids and neither of them noticed that I had pulled the plug on the sat TV until a month after it had been shut off so it really was no loss at all.
If you extend this policy to all businesses and persons then everyone will have a trusted identity and there will no longer be a need for costly server certificates on web servers. If this is true then I will support the adoption of this "Trusted Internet ID" plan. Alternatively, if this is just another "bolted on" form of security that still requires the legacy RSA certificates, I will not support this plan.
I strongly doubt that the Obama administration would be willing to push a plan that eliminates the "business need" for RSA certificates so I guess I will oppose this plan.
I read the paper. He points out that there is a lack of detectable nitrogen in the fossils. This is the basis for his belief that they are extraterrestrial in origin. He also notes that fossils of cyanobacteria on Earth from 2.7 billion years ago have a lack of detectable nitrogen. He shows lots of charts and graphs of mass spectrometer data with most other Earth based fossils showing nitrogen. He does not explain the correlation of lack of nitrogen in these fossils and the 2.7 Gya Earth based cyanobacteria fossils. It's staring him in the face and he doesn't see it.
Here's my theory and I would be happy if someone could point to some element of the paper that would disprove it: A large carbonaceous chondrite meteor hit a swap on Earth 2.7 billion years ago and caused some ejecta to fly off. The ejecta consisted of a mixture of the original asteroid and the swamp (including the bacteria). Some of the ejecta landed elsewhere on the earth and appeared to be a meteor. Several billion years later an ambitious NASA scientist wants to prove his theory of extraterrestrial life so he writes this paper without considering other possible explanations for his observations. His conclusions are not based upon the facts. They are speculation.
Of those who students who ended up not attending Stanford, how many of them also applied at Brown? Maybe the best students are applying at all of the good schools so they have more choices as to where they end up. If all students applied to approximately 10 schools each, the low admission rates would be correct and expected.
Why does our president want to grow the size of our government in most other areas, but privatize our space launch capability? His argument that the private sector is more efficient is a valid one. If he truly believes that the private sector is more efficient, then why not reduce our government by also outsourcing most other functions? Education is a good example. Bush tried to do this with his school voucher system and the democrats shot it down. What gives?
I do business with three different banks. All of them offer me the option of waiving the paper statements. In exchange for this they agree to make my electronic statements available to me for a year. If you cannot remember to download your statements at least once per year, perhaps you should have a conservator manage your finances for you.
I believe that HP/Agilent was the first company to do this. They would manufacture something with gobs of RAM and then charge you extra money to enable the 'option' that was already present. It costs less for a manufacturer to produce a single version of their product than for multiple versions with different capabilities. Intel realizes this but their marketing people are full of shit (just like HP's were). They didn't lose any money when they sold you the processor. The software unlock is 100% pure profit. It's really annoying to know that you have paid for and posses capability that you cannot use.
Physicists have postulated that we could create our own baby universes with a properly equipped laboratory. Who's to say that's not how ours was created?
Perhaps our leaders are more compassionate when it comes to human life? Dropping nukes on innocent civilians was done once already. I don't think we're likely to take that approach again. The approach that we are taking is to give the citizens in Afghanistan civil rights and an education. Once they have those things, they will be unlikely to want to surrender them. Time will tell.
Regardless of the politics involved, this information was classified and it was marked as such. It was disclosed illegally and the newspapers (at least NYT) have a legal obligation to not print it. They've skirted the issue by interpreting the content and publishing summaries instead. There are guidelines for classifying data that determine the classification level based upon how much damage (often in terms of lives lost) that the disclosure would cause. The world is a rough place and the US has many enemies. Perhaps pouring billions into Pakistan while they are helping our enemy is not the wisest move. What should the US do instead? Is there a better solution? Should we just let the Taliban have Afghanistan back? Maybe they can reorganize and wage a whole new set of attacks against us. Yeah I know the Taliban didn't directly attack us, OBL did. The Taliban supported his actions and continue to assist in keeping him from justice. There are no perfect solutions but publishing the secret communications of one government does harm to that government. Which side are we on people?
Of course I anticipate the open-minded responses criticizing my "dualistic" thinking. All of the open mindedness in the world will not change who the Taliban are or what they stand for (and it is not open mindedness). They hate us because we are free. We are not required to hate them back, but we are required to prevent them from any killing more of us. If that is not a "national security" issue, then I don't know what is.
AMPRnet has been around for 20 years. There are hundreds (maybe thousands now?) of TCP/IP nodes worldwide that provide a gateway between AMPRnet (44.0.0.0/24) and the Internet. The two nearest to me are at Cal Tech and UCSD. The TRW ARC used to have one too. I'm not sure if it is still operating.
The French have basically outlawed something because of interoperability. The D-Star stuff can be networked. They could have simply said "Don't connect it to the Internet" instead of making it illegal to use.
I live in California and my phone has been ringing with robocalls about 4 times a day for the past 2 weeks. (There's an election on Tuesday.) I've answered a few of them and listened to the messages left by the rest. NONE of them were introduced by a person. Most of the calls had a caller ID originating in California. A few of them were blocked.
The most annoying feature of these political calls is that there is no way to opt out. The DMA/FTC lists are exempted from political calls and these calls do not even give you a way to tell them not to call you again.
They are cheap, fast, and reliable. IMHO Synology makes the best ones. I've had a DS409+ for over a year and it provides 6TB wherever and whenever I want it.
When I signed up for DirecTV in 1995 they were a great company. They stood out among the cable tv providers as a company with some integrity. Over time they've degenerated down to the level of their competition. I never watch much tv anyway but the rest of my family does sometimes. I was delighted when one of my kids asked me (a month after I had turned it off) what was wrong with the tv... If nobody noticed for a month, it was hardly worth paying for any longer.
As an aside, I looked into FiOS tv since they claim it's cheaper and better than DirecTV. What I found was that it actually costs more once you factor in the rental fees on the converter boxes. Also they pretend to offer discounted prices on their bundle packages (phone, tv, internet) but the discounts assume outrageously high base prices that nobody in their right mind would pay anyway (e.g. $56/month for POTS!)
We have Netflix, a hacked AppleTV, DVD players, and a computer in pretty much every room. We don't need subscription tv anymore.
OK I'm running Firefox (3.5.9) on Ubuntu Linux and I went to the site. It warned me that the site was a forgery and I clicked the "ignore this warning" button. The site prompted me to enter some credit card information which I did (false of course) and on the next page it said that I failed the test and that my information was not transmitted so I shouldn't worry but that I should have someone who is technically competent verify this. I decided to have a quick look at the previous page source to see if the submit form included the card number and when I selected 'View->Page Source' from Firefox I got the same forgery warning instead of viewing the source. The "ignore this warning" button didn't work at this point so I guess I cannot verify the claim on the page withe Firefox alone. This seems rather broken to me as the page source display doesn't execute malicious code.
Yes I know I could save the page or use wget but why doesn't Firefox let me look at the suspected page's SOURCE? How could that possibly be harmful?
They may successfully argue that it is still legal. Their method is to call themselves with spoofed caller-id. The network fills in the name associated with the phone number and they build their database. Since they are only calling themselves and they know they are spoofing, they are not "intending to defraud or deceive" anyone.
Slashdot Mirror
Light travels rather slowly considering the scale of our local group of galaxies.
I've had Netflix for about 5 years. Aside from a VCR/DVD player, I've also got a Roku box, an Apple TV (first gen and hacked), an iPad2, a computer (Ubuntu/Win7), a Wii, and an antenna (which I never use) connected to my living room TV.
The streaming quality from Apple is not bad. The resolution is 1080p but the frame rate is not so great. This becomes really apparent during scenes where the camera pans. Overall the Apple TV performance is good. Amazon video is not quite as good as Netflix. They seem to compress more and they have less HD content. I can stream Netflix from my Wii, Roku, or the computer. The Wii is only 480p so we will not talk about that. The Roku (720p) and computer (1080p) performance is variable. On a good day the pictures are sharp and vibrant. On a typical day there will be some pixelation while playing movies. This has become worse and worse over time. I've checked my network when this happens and it's always fine.
My conclusion is that the Netflix issue is due to a bottleneck on the remote end or somewhere in the middle. Either Netflix does not have a sufficiently wide pipe, or Verizon is traffic shaping somewhere near their backbone. Another alternative is that Neflix is just compressing the content as much as they can until a certain percentage of subscribers complain.
Anyway I don't miss the satellite bills. I've got two kids and neither of them noticed that I had pulled the plug on the sat TV until a month after it had been shut off so it really was no loss at all.
I strongly doubt that the Obama administration would be willing to push a plan that eliminates the "business need" for RSA certificates so I guess I will oppose this plan.
My car can rip CDs to the internal hard drive too. Should we also ban the production and sale of all BMW cars equipped with iDrive?
Here's my theory and I would be happy if someone could point to some element of the paper that would disprove it: A large carbonaceous chondrite meteor hit a swap on Earth 2.7 billion years ago and caused some ejecta to fly off. The ejecta consisted of a mixture of the original asteroid and the swamp (including the bacteria). Some of the ejecta landed elsewhere on the earth and appeared to be a meteor. Several billion years later an ambitious NASA scientist wants to prove his theory of extraterrestrial life so he writes this paper without considering other possible explanations for his observations. His conclusions are not based upon the facts. They are speculation.
Fox news disagrees: Billionaire Soros Pays for Additional Reporters for NPR Partner Initiative
I've seen new grads talk about cheating and they justify it by saying that everyone else does it. Somehow moral equivalence has replaced ethics.
Of those who students who ended up not attending Stanford, how many of them also applied at Brown? Maybe the best students are applying at all of the good schools so they have more choices as to where they end up. If all students applied to approximately 10 schools each, the low admission rates would be correct and expected.
Why does our president want to grow the size of our government in most other areas, but privatize our space launch capability? His argument that the private sector is more efficient is a valid one. If he truly believes that the private sector is more efficient, then why not reduce our government by also outsourcing most other functions? Education is a good example. Bush tried to do this with his school voucher system and the democrats shot it down. What gives?
I do business with three different banks. All of them offer me the option of waiving the paper statements. In exchange for this they agree to make my electronic statements available to me for a year. If you cannot remember to download your statements at least once per year, perhaps you should have a conservator manage your finances for you.
What a coincidence that their server upgrade began just after the slashdot story was posted...
I believe that HP/Agilent was the first company to do this. They would manufacture something with gobs of RAM and then charge you extra money to enable the 'option' that was already present. It costs less for a manufacturer to produce a single version of their product than for multiple versions with different capabilities. Intel realizes this but their marketing people are full of shit (just like HP's were). They didn't lose any money when they sold you the processor. The software unlock is 100% pure profit. It's really annoying to know that you have paid for and posses capability that you cannot use.
Physicists have postulated that we could create our own baby universes with a properly equipped laboratory. Who's to say that's not how ours was created?
Perhaps our leaders are more compassionate when it comes to human life? Dropping nukes on innocent civilians was done once already. I don't think we're likely to take that approach again. The approach that we are taking is to give the citizens in Afghanistan civil rights and an education. Once they have those things, they will be unlikely to want to surrender them. Time will tell.
Of course I anticipate the open-minded responses criticizing my "dualistic" thinking. All of the open mindedness in the world will not change who the Taliban are or what they stand for (and it is not open mindedness). They hate us because we are free. We are not required to hate them back, but we are required to prevent them from any killing more of us. If that is not a "national security" issue, then I don't know what is.
I forgot to include the main project page: http://mysite.ncnetwork.net/resnzk6d/
Here's a great sample on YouTube from the Telecrapper 2000 "Hip Hurts" stack: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlK_zHisT_A
The French have basically outlawed something because of interoperability. The D-Star stuff can be networked. They could have simply said "Don't connect it to the Internet" instead of making it illegal to use.
Subscribe to "Dr. Dobb's Journal" and "Nuts & Volts"
The most annoying feature of these political calls is that there is no way to opt out. The DMA/FTC lists are exempted from political calls and these calls do not even give you a way to tell them not to call you again.
They are cheap, fast, and reliable. IMHO Synology makes the best ones. I've had a DS409+ for over a year and it provides 6TB wherever and whenever I want it.
As an aside, I looked into FiOS tv since they claim it's cheaper and better than DirecTV. What I found was that it actually costs more once you factor in the rental fees on the converter boxes. Also they pretend to offer discounted prices on their bundle packages (phone, tv, internet) but the discounts assume outrageously high base prices that nobody in their right mind would pay anyway (e.g. $56/month for POTS!)
We have Netflix, a hacked AppleTV, DVD players, and a computer in pretty much every room. We don't need subscription tv anymore.
Yes I know I could save the page or use wget but why doesn't Firefox let me look at the suspected page's SOURCE? How could that possibly be harmful?
They may successfully argue that it is still legal. Their method is to call themselves with spoofed caller-id. The network fills in the name associated with the phone number and they build their database. Since they are only calling themselves and they know they are spoofing, they are not "intending to defraud or deceive" anyone.
The US House recently passed a bill to make caller ID spoofing illegal. Hopefully the Senate will soon follow suit.